JSW STEEL LTD vs. ASST CIT CIR 11(5),

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed whereas revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05

depreciation which is not charged to the profit and loss account but is otherwise disclosed in the notes of the accounts, it would come within the ambit of the expression "shown" in the profit and loss account, as notes to accounts form part of the profit and loss account by virtue of subsection (6) of section 211

ASST CIT CIR 11(5) vs. JSW STEEL LTD,

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed whereas revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05

depreciation which is not charged to the profit and loss account but is otherwise disclosed in the notes of the accounts, it would come within the ambit of the expression "shown" in the profit and loss account, as notes to accounts form part of the profit and loss account by virtue of subsection (6) of section 211

ITO 9(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. KITEC INDUSTRIES (IND) LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. G. S. Pannu, Vp & Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4535/Mum/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

section 211(3C) of the Companies Act, 1956, brouhta notification GSR no. 225(E) or. 31st March 2009 i.e. the Central Government, in consultation with National Advisory Committee on Accounting' Standards, amended the(Accounting Standards) Rules, 2006. In which, the annexure wider the heading B. ACCOUNTING STANDARDS", in the sub-heading Accounting Standard (AS) 11, relating to "The Effect

DCB BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 2 (3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

depreciation as adopted for the purpose of preparing the accounts, which would ultimately be laid before the Annual General Meeting. A Banking company in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 115JB can prepare additional accounts as per provisions of Parts II and III of Schedule VI of the Companies Act or fulfill the requirements of the proviso

DCIT (LTU) 2, MUMBAI vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri G.Manjunathaआअसं. 1804/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2011-12) आअसं. 1805/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2012-13) आअसं. 1806/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2013-14) आअसं. 1807/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2014-15) Union Bank Of India, Central Accounts Dept., 6Th Floor, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 Pan:Aaacu0564G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

211 of the Companies Act to prepare their profit and loss account in accordance with the Schedule VI of the Companies Act, 1956, profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the provisions of their regulatory Acts shall be taken as a basis for computing the book profit under section 115JB.” The above para clearly specifies that the amendment

DCIT (LTU) 2, MUMBAI vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri G.Manjunathaआअसं. 1804/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2011-12) आअसं. 1805/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2012-13) आअसं. 1806/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2013-14) आअसं. 1807/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2014-15) Union Bank Of India, Central Accounts Dept., 6Th Floor, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 Pan:Aaacu0564G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

211 of the Companies Act to prepare their profit and loss account in accordance with the Schedule VI of the Companies Act, 1956, profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the provisions of their regulatory Acts shall be taken as a basis for computing the book profit under section 115JB.” The above para clearly specifies that the amendment

UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU) 2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri G.Manjunathaआअसं. 1804/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2011-12) आअसं. 1805/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2012-13) आअसं. 1806/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2013-14) आअसं. 1807/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2014-15) Union Bank Of India, Central Accounts Dept., 6Th Floor, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 Pan:Aaacu0564G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

211 of the Companies Act to prepare their profit and loss account in accordance with the Schedule VI of the Companies Act, 1956, profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the provisions of their regulatory Acts shall be taken as a basis for computing the book profit under section 115JB.” The above para clearly specifies that the amendment

UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU) 2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri G.Manjunathaआअसं. 1804/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2011-12) आअसं. 1805/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2012-13) आअसं. 1806/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2013-14) आअसं. 1807/मुं/2018 ("न.व 2014-15) Union Bank Of India, Central Accounts Dept., 6Th Floor, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 Pan:Aaacu0564G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

211 of the Companies Act to prepare their profit and loss account in accordance with the Schedule VI of the Companies Act, 1956, profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the provisions of their regulatory Acts shall be taken as a basis for computing the book profit under section 115JB.” The above para clearly specifies that the amendment

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ROAD DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD,ORRISSA vs. DCIT 14(3)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms of the order in ITA

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Thiruvananthapuram Road Dcit-14(3)(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ (Earlier Dcit-10(1), The Il & Fs Financial Centre, Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Vs. Plot No.C-22, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla M. K. Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aacct0547J Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-14(3)(1), Thiruvananthapuram Road (Earlier Dcit-10(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.455, 4Th Floor, The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Plot No.C-22, M. K. Road, G Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aacct0547J

Section- 32(1)(ii) and the appellant may be granted the depreciation treating the said right as intangible right at the applicable rate. The appellant prays that the appellant be granted depreciation of Rs. 215,72,80,138/-. 3. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1 & 2, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant prays that

DCIT 14(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. THIRVANTHAPURAM ROAD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms of the order in ITA

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Thiruvananthapuram Road Dcit-14(3)(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ (Earlier Dcit-10(1), The Il & Fs Financial Centre, Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Vs. Plot No.C-22, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla M. K. Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aacct0547J Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-14(3)(1), Thiruvananthapuram Road (Earlier Dcit-10(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.455, 4Th Floor, The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Plot No.C-22, M. K. Road, G Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aacct0547J

Section- 32(1)(ii) and the appellant may be granted the depreciation treating the said right as intangible right at the applicable rate. The appellant prays that the appellant be granted depreciation of Rs. 215,72,80,138/-. 3. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1 & 2, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant prays that

ADDL.C.I.T. RG.3(3), MUMBAI vs. AAVARAN TEXTILES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2008 - 2009 Addl. Cit Range 3(3) Aavaram Textiles Pvt Ltd., Mumbai 81-A, Mittal Court, बनाम/ 224 Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai 400 021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee)

depreciation has to be provided as per the rates provided under the Companies Act or Income Tax Act. Now what happens in case there is a destruction of an asset which is comprised in the block of assets (for the purpose of Income Tax Act) but is included as an individual asset in the Schedule to ‘Fixed Assets’. In such

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ANDRA PRADESH EXPRESSWAY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

211 (Kurnool) on NH-7 in the State of Andhra Pradesh under North-South Corridor (NHDP Phase II) on BOT (Annuity) basis] as per the terms of CA dated 20.03.2006 signed between NHAI and assessee-company. The assessee had filed its return of income on 26.09.2011 declaring loss of Rs. 88,91,21,522/- and the assessee initially claimed depreciation

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ANDHRA PRADESH EXPRESSWAY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

211 (Kurnool) on NH-7 in the State of Andhra Pradesh under North-South Corridor (NHDP Phase II) on BOT (Annuity) basis] as per the terms of CA dated 20.03.2006 signed between NHAI and assessee-company. The assessee had filed its return of income on 26.09.2011 declaring loss of Rs. 88,91,21,522/- and the assessee initially claimed depreciation

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ANDHRA PRADESH EXPRESSWAY LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

211 (Kurnool) on NH-7 in the State of Andhra Pradesh under North-South Corridor (NHDP Phase II) on BOT (Annuity) basis] as per the terms of CA dated 20.03.2006 signed between NHAI and assessee-company. The assessee had filed its return of income on 26.09.2011 declaring loss of Rs. 88,91,21,522/- and the assessee initially claimed depreciation

M/S ANDHRA PRADESH EXPRESSWAY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

211 (Kurnool) on NH-7 in the State of Andhra Pradesh under North-South Corridor (NHDP Phase II) on BOT (Annuity) basis] as per the terms of CA dated 20.03.2006 signed between NHAI and assessee-company. The assessee had filed its return of income on 26.09.2011 declaring loss of Rs. 88,91,21,522/- and the assessee initially claimed depreciation

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ANDHRA PRADESH EXPRESSWAY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

211 (Kurnool) on NH-7 in the State of Andhra Pradesh under North-South Corridor (NHDP Phase II) on BOT (Annuity) basis] as per the terms of CA dated 20.03.2006 signed between NHAI and assessee-company. The assessee had filed its return of income on 26.09.2011 declaring loss of Rs. 88,91,21,522/- and the assessee initially claimed depreciation

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ANDHRA PRADESH EXPRESSWAY LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

211 (Kurnool) on NH-7 in the State of Andhra Pradesh under North-South Corridor (NHDP Phase II) on BOT (Annuity) basis] as per the terms of CA dated 20.03.2006 signed between NHAI and assessee-company. The assessee had filed its return of income on 26.09.2011 declaring loss of Rs. 88,91,21,522/- and the assessee initially claimed depreciation

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ANDHRA PRADESH EXPRESSWAY LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

211 (Kurnool) on NH-7 in the State of Andhra Pradesh under North-South Corridor (NHDP Phase II) on BOT (Annuity) basis] as per the terms of CA dated 20.03.2006 signed between NHAI and assessee-company. The assessee had filed its return of income on 26.09.2011 declaring loss of Rs. 88,91,21,522/- and the assessee initially claimed depreciation