GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RANGE 6(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

32(1)(iia) of the Act is a beneficial provision and therefore should be interpreted liberally. The AO, vide order passed under section 143(3) of the Act, did not accept the submissions of the assessee and held that the words used in the section clearly mentioned that plant and machinery should be acquired

WELSPUN CORP LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

disallowing claim of additional depreciation on the cost of Plant & Machinery of 1,64,23,35,348/- and 78,09,11,306/- purchased in the previous years relevant to A.Ys.2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively. b) The ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that after the amendment of section 32(1)(iia

SIR RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in both AY 2014-15 and AY

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

iia) any asset, not being an investment or deposit in any of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11, where such asset is not held by the trust or institution, otherwise than in any of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11, after the expiry of one year from

SIR RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. ADDITIONAL /JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NFAC, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in both AY 2014-15 and AY

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

iia) any asset, not being an investment or deposit in any of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11, where such asset is not held by the trust or institution, otherwise than in any of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11, after the expiry of one year from

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(4),MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. LUBRIZOL INDIA PVT LTD, THANE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassistant Commissioner Of Vs Lubrizol India Pvt Ltd Income-Tax-3(4), Mumbai 9/3, Lubrizol India Private Limited- 5Th Room No.559, Floor, Plant, Thane Belapur Road, Turbhe Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate Naka, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai, Thane- Mumbai-400 020 400 705 Pan: Aaacl0126H Appellant Respondent

disallowance under section 37(1) and claim of deduction under section 80G. Hence, the appeal is allowed.” 8. After considering the arguments presented by both parties and reviewing the documents on record, we observe that Section 32(1)(iia

M/S GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU)-1, MUMBAI

iia), the ratio laid down in the above cases squarely applies\nto the facts of the instant case in the context of section 32AC.\n245. The AR of the assessee also contended that if a strict interpretation is\nadopted for the word \"and\" used in the term \"acquired and installed\", to\nunderstand it in its normal grammatical sense

ACG ASSOCATION CAPSULES P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

disallowed by the ld. A.O. The ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, allowed the additional claim of depreciation by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s. Rittal India Pvt. Ltd. 380 ITR 423 (Kar). 46. The Revenue is in appeal before us, challenging the order

DCIT- CC - 7(3), MUMBAI vs. ACG ASSOCIATED CAPSULES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

disallowed by the ld. A.O. The ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, allowed the additional claim of depreciation by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s. Rittal India Pvt. Ltd. 380 ITR 423 (Kar). 46. The Revenue is in appeal before us, challenging the order

ACG ASSOCATION CAPSULES P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

disallowed by the ld. A.O. The ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, allowed the additional claim of depreciation by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s. Rittal India Pvt. Ltd. 380 ITR 423 (Kar). 46. The Revenue is in appeal before us, challenging the order

DCIT CC- 7(3), MUMBAI vs. ACG ASSOCIATED CAPSULES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, no question of law arises

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

disallowed by the ld. A.O. The ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, allowed the additional claim of depreciation by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s. Rittal India Pvt. Ltd. 380 ITR 423 (Kar). 46. The Revenue is in appeal before us, challenging the order

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

disallowing others. Several other grounds concerning capital receipts, survey expenses, prior period expenses, additional depreciation, business loss on oil bonds, and expenditure for share capital increase were decided with mixed results for both parties.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": ["40A(9)", "37(1)", "80IB", "14A", "36(2)", "36(1)(vii)", "43B(f)", "32(1)(iia

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 1(3)1, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. GRINDWELL NORTON LIMITED, LEELA BUSINESS PARK MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are allowed, in aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

disallowance of depreciation on intangible assets. The Revenue has not been unable to show any distinguishing factor in the impugned assessment year, hence, we see no reason to deviate from settled position. Thus, ground No. 1 of appeal by the Revenue is dismissed being devoid of any merit. Additional depreciation claimed under section 32(1)(iia

GETINGE MEDICAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

disallowance is a delay in filing Form 10-IC. Since section 115BAA of the Act makes it mandatory to file the form 10-IC within the date specified, absence of that indicates that it is simply a case wherein the 11 Getinge Medical India Private Limited claim under section 115BAA has not even been made as per the procedure given

DCIT - CC-3(2), MUMBAI vs. AARTI DRUGS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 32(1)(iia) of the Act does not allow any carry forward of additional depreciation. Accordingly, additional depreciation to the extent of Rs.3,04,34,108/- was disallowed

HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. - 1(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5559/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5576/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5560/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Hindalco Industries Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) 3Rd Floor, Century Bhawan, 9Th Floor, Room No.902, Vs. Dr. A.B Road, Worli, Old Cgo Building, M. K. Mumbai-400030. Road, Mumbai-400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5796/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5769/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5770/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) बिधम/ Hindalco Industries Ltd. 9Th Floor, Room No.902, 3Rd Floor, Century Vs. Old Cgo Building, M. K. Bhawan, Dr. A.B Road, Road, Mumbai-400020. Worli, Mumbai-400030. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach1201R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. J. Pardiwala A/W S. M Bandi Revenue By: Shri K. C. Selvamani (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2023

iia). 18. The AO has disallowed the claim of the appellant stating that, on a literal reading of section 32(1

DCIT CEN CIR 1(4), MUMBAI vs. HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5559/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5576/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5560/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Hindalco Industries Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) 3Rd Floor, Century Bhawan, 9Th Floor, Room No.902, Vs. Dr. A.B Road, Worli, Old Cgo Building, M. K. Mumbai-400030. Road, Mumbai-400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5796/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5769/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5770/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) बिधम/ Hindalco Industries Ltd. 9Th Floor, Room No.902, 3Rd Floor, Century Vs. Old Cgo Building, M. K. Bhawan, Dr. A.B Road, Road, Mumbai-400020. Worli, Mumbai-400030. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach1201R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. J. Pardiwala A/W S. M Bandi Revenue By: Shri K. C. Selvamani (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2023

iia). 18. The AO has disallowed the claim of the appellant stating that, on a literal reading of section 32(1

DCIT CENT. CIR. - 1(4), MUMBAI vs. HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5559/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5576/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5560/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Hindalco Industries Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) 3Rd Floor, Century Bhawan, 9Th Floor, Room No.902, Vs. Dr. A.B Road, Worli, Old Cgo Building, M. K. Mumbai-400030. Road, Mumbai-400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5796/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5769/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5770/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) बिधम/ Hindalco Industries Ltd. 9Th Floor, Room No.902, 3Rd Floor, Century Vs. Old Cgo Building, M. K. Bhawan, Dr. A.B Road, Road, Mumbai-400020. Worli, Mumbai-400030. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach1201R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. J. Pardiwala A/W S. M Bandi Revenue By: Shri K. C. Selvamani (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2023

iia). 18. The AO has disallowed the claim of the appellant stating that, on a literal reading of section 32(1

HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 1(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5559/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5576/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5560/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Hindalco Industries Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) 3Rd Floor, Century Bhawan, 9Th Floor, Room No.902, Vs. Dr. A.B Road, Worli, Old Cgo Building, M. K. Mumbai-400030. Road, Mumbai-400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5796/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5769/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 5770/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Central Circle-1(4) बिधम/ Hindalco Industries Ltd. 9Th Floor, Room No.902, 3Rd Floor, Century Vs. Old Cgo Building, M. K. Bhawan, Dr. A.B Road, Road, Mumbai-400020. Worli, Mumbai-400030. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach1201R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. J. Pardiwala A/W S. M Bandi Revenue By: Shri K. C. Selvamani (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2023

iia). 18. The AO has disallowed the claim of the appellant stating that, on a literal reading of section 32(1