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

32(1)(iia) of the IT Act, 1961?” 15. And the Hon’ble High Court has answered the question of law as under: - “9. It could be thus, seen that the Karnataka High Court in Rittal India Pvt. Ltd, (supra) even without the aid of the statutory amendment held that remaining 50% unclaimed depreciation would be available to the assessee

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

32(1)(iia) of the IT Act, 1961?” 15. And the Hon’ble High Court has answered the question of law as under: - “9. It could be thus, seen that the Karnataka High Court in Rittal India Pvt. Ltd, (supra) even without the aid of the statutory amendment held that remaining 50% unclaimed depreciation would be available to the assessee

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

32(1)(iia) of the IT Act, 1961?” 15. And the Hon’ble High Court has answered the question of law as under: - “9. It could be thus, seen that the Karnataka High Court in Rittal India Pvt. Ltd, (supra) even without the aid of the statutory amendment held that remaining 50% unclaimed depreciation would be available to the assessee

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

32(1)(iia) of the IT Act, 1961?” 15. And the Hon’ble High Court has answered the question of law as under: - “9. It could be thus, seen that the Karnataka High Court in Rittal India Pvt. Ltd, (supra) even without the aid of the statutory amendment held that remaining 50% unclaimed depreciation would be available to the assessee

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

iia) of clause (24) of section 2, or which is of the nature referred to in sub- section (4A) of section 11, tax shall be charged on so much of the relevant income as is not exempt under section 11 or section 12, as if the relevant income not so exempt were the income of an association of persons:\nProvided

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. LARSEN AND TOUBRO LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the cross appeal filed by the revenue as well as\nassessee stands dismissed

reassessment\nproceedings.\n5. Ground number 1-2 of the revenues appeal is regarding the\nentitlement to claim deduction in respect of expenditure incurred in\nconnection with the slum sale giving rise to capital gains as per\nsection 48 (i) of the act, despite application of section 50 B of the\nact.\n5.1. The Ld.AR submitted that during the year under

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the cross-objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Reliance Industries Ltd., Room No. 559, 5Th Floor, 3Rd Floor Maker Chamber Iv, Aayakar Bhavan, New Marine Vs. Nariman Point, S.O. Lines, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacr 5055 K Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings in relation to an alleged excess deduction claimed under section 80IB(9) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (―the Act‖), purportedly without adjusting the additional depreciation allowable under section 32(1)(iia

NAYARA ENERGY LIMITED (ON BEHALF OF MERGED ENTITY VADINAR OIL TERMINAL LIMITED ),MUMBAI vs. ASSTT CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

IIA) be held as deductible as claimed.\nPage 5 of 66\nITA No 778/MUM/2022\nNayara Energy Limited\n[ On behalfof VadinarOil Terminal Limited]\nV\nACIT Central Circle -2 (1), Mumbai\nAY 2017-18\n7. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT\n(A) and the learned AO erred on facts and in\nlaw in not allowing the interest expenses

PROCTER & GAMGLE HYGIENE& HEALTHCARE ,LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

iia), as the case may be. When an asset purchased is satisfied the above condition in the year of purchase that asset will be included in the respective block of asset. Depreciation for that year will be calculated on ITA. No. 6591 & 6549/Mum/2010 (AY 2004-05) ITA. No. 2780 & 2849/Mum/2011 (AY 2005-06) written down value in accordance with section

ADDL CIT RG 7(1), MUMBAI vs. PROCTOR & GAMBLE HYGIENE & HEALTHCARE LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

iia), as the case may be. When an asset purchased is satisfied the above condition in the year of purchase that asset will be included in the respective block of asset. Depreciation for that year will be calculated on ITA. No. 6591 & 6549/Mum/2010 (AY 2004-05) ITA. No. 2780 & 2849/Mum/2011 (AY 2005-06) written down value in accordance with section

TATA STEEL LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

32,000 West Mn 7,42,000 12,292 50,762 6,91,238 849,66,97,496 Bamebari Iron 68,000 1,722 0 68,000 117,0,96,000 Mn 0 0 Monmora Iron 4,800 1,722 0 4,800 82,65,600 Mn 8 12,292 558 -550 -67,60,600 Total

DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. TATA STEEL LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

32,000 West Mn 7,42,000 12,292 50,762 6,91,238 849,66,97,496 Bamebari Iron 68,000 1,722 0 68,000 117,0,96,000 Mn 0 0 Monmora Iron 4,800 1,722 0 4,800 82,65,600 Mn 8 12,292 558 -550 -67,60,600 Total

THE TATA POWER CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Ms. Padmavathy.Sआअसं.753/मुं/2013 (िन.व. 2008-09) The Tata Power Co. Ltd. Corporate Center, Block ‘B’, 5Th Floor, 34, Sant Thukaram Road, Carnak Bunder, Mumbai 400 009. Pan: Aaact-0054-A ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 2(3), Mumbai. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ....."ितवादी/Respondent

section 80IA(5) would show that deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act is to be allowed on the profits and gains of eligible business and not each unit of the business. The assessee is treating each unit of windmill as a separate business. Without prejudice to his primary contention the ld. Departmental Representative referred to the assessment order (Para

DCIT, CIRCLE-1 ,, THANE vs. EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

section 38 of the Sales Tax Act was ntime, section 38 of the Sales Tax Act was amended which provides that where the NPV of amended which provides that where the NPV of amended which provides that where the NPV of deferred tax as may be prescribed was paid, the deferred tax as may be prescribed was paid, the deferred

EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD. ,NOIDA vs. DY CIT CIRCLE- 1 , THANE

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

section 38 of the Sales Tax Act was ntime, section 38 of the Sales Tax Act was amended which provides that where the NPV of amended which provides that where the NPV of amended which provides that where the NPV of deferred tax as may be prescribed was paid, the deferred tax as may be prescribed was paid, the deferred

EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD. ,NOIDA vs. DY CIT CIRCLE- 1 , THANE

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

section 38 of the Sales Tax Act was ntime, section 38 of the Sales Tax Act was amended which provides that where the NPV of amended which provides that where the NPV of amended which provides that where the NPV of deferred tax as may be prescribed was paid, the deferred tax as may be prescribed was paid, the deferred

DCIT CIRCLE-1, THANE vs. M/S EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well appeals of the assessee are a...

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

section 38 of the Sales Tax Act was ntime, section 38 of the Sales Tax Act was amended which provides that where the NPV of amended which provides that where the NPV of amended which provides that where the NPV of deferred tax as may be prescribed was paid, the deferred tax as may be prescribed was paid, the deferred

EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD,NOIDA vs. DY CIT CIRLCE-1, THANE

In the result, the In the result, the assessee and Revenue are are educated as under:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Everest Industries Limited, Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- 201301, Vs. Wing, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Uttar Pradesh Estate, Thane(W)- 400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment has been rendered merely academic. Therefore, we are not has been rendered merely academic. Therefore has been rendered merely academic. Therefore adjudicating the grounds adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee and same are left by the assessee and same are left open to the assessee open to the assessee to challenge in case the decision on merit

DCIT, CIRCLE-1 ,, THANE vs. EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the In the result, the assessee and Revenue are are educated as under:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Everest Industries Limited, Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- 201301, Vs. Wing, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Uttar Pradesh Estate, Thane(W)- 400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment has been rendered merely academic. Therefore, we are not has been rendered merely academic. Therefore has been rendered merely academic. Therefore adjudicating the grounds adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee and same are left by the assessee and same are left open to the assessee open to the assessee to challenge in case the decision on merit