KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE

The appeal is allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

additional income on account of disallowance of depreciation on 26 assets claimed to be leased. b) Treatment of bonus payments

JT.COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,SURAT vs. SAHELI LEASING & INDUSTRIES LTD

Appeals stand allowed as mentioned hereinabove but with

depreciation, the taxable income of the Assessee was NIL and hence, there was no tax liability. According to Assessee, in such a case no penalty under Section 271 (1) (c) could have been levied. 16. Deputy Commissioner of Income tax, Special Range-2, C.As. @ SLP (C) No. 5241 of 2007 etc…. (contd.) 7 Surat, on the basis of the discussion

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,DIBRUGARH vs. DOOM DOOMA INDIA LTD

depreciation to be computed in cases falling under Rule 8 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, which deals with taxability of composite income? These are the two questions which arise for determination in this batch of civil appeals. Background facts in Civil Appeal No. of 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.13070 of 2007) 5. The facts in all these

M/S.VIRTUAL SOFT SYSTEMS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-I

additional income tax" would be levied. The facts of the case were: - "During the calendar year 1950, the assessee company had made a profit but the depreciation

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) 2 vs. M/S MAHAGUN REALTORS (P) LTD

The appeal is allowed, in the above terms, without order on costs

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

additional income nor brought it to the notice of the AO. Further, on 20.03.2007, the assessee issued postdated cheques in the name of MRPL. After merger, they were neither taken back nor fresh cheques were submitted from the amalgamated company MIPL. 11. It was submitted that in these circumstances, when assessment proceedings were effectively resisted, during which

VODAFONE IDEA LTD(EARLIER KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 26 (2)

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

depreciation as claimed and by taxing the interest income of Rs.1,07,85,590 as income from other sources and thus raised the demand of Rs. 1,30,83,741 under various heads and sections of taxes, surcharge and additional

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III, BANGALORE vs. M/S WIPRO LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

additional depreciation, over and above the usual or ordinary depreciation mandatorily allowed under Section 32(1) of the IT Act. This option had to be exercised by the assessee by filing a statutory Form 3- AA along with the Return of Income

PLASTIBLENDS INDIA LIMITED THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR vs. ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 8(2) MUMBAI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

Additional Commissioner of Income-Tax & Ors.15 and the following manner in which the position has been summed up by the High Court: “44. To summarise, firstly, the Apex Court decision in the case of Mahendra Mills (supra) cannot be construed to mean that by disclaiming depreciation

M/S. I.C.D.S. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are allowed; the impugned

income for the relevant assessment years, the assessee claimed, among other heads, depreciation in relation to certain assets, (additions made

M/S KARNATAKA SMALL S.INDT.DEV.COR.LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,BANGALORE

income should be quantified under section 115-J (1), to be carried forward under sub-section 2 of section 115-J. It allows only the unabsorbed losses, depreciation, investment allowance etc. which otherwise could have been carried forward, to be carried forward. This construction of sub sections (1) and (2) section http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I vs. M/S RELIANCE ENERGY LTD (FORMERLY BSES LTD.) THROUGH ITS M.D

The Appeal is dismissed qua the issue of the extent of deduction under

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO

depreciation. 2 | P a g e The Assessing Officer considered the revised claim of the Assessee under Section 80-IA and determined the amount eligible for deduction under Section 80-IA at Rs. 492,78,60,973/- against the Assessee’s claim of Rs. 546,26,01,224/-. However, the Assessing Officer stated in the assessment order that the actual

EAST INDIA HOTELS LTD., CALCUTTA vs. COMNR. OF INCOME TAX, CALCUTTA

Appeal is allowed accordingly

Income Tax Rules. Whether it is prior to 1.4.1970 or thereafter, depreciation is allowed on "machinery and plant", mentioned as Item III in the Appendix. Prior to 1.4.1970, the rate of depreciation on machinery and plant was 7 per cent. But in the case of a concern working double shift, an additional

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. UNITED PROVINCES ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO

In the result, appeal is allowed

additional http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 10 amount, it should be held that the amount becomes taxable only when the compensation is finally determined. In the said case, the Court dealt with similar provision Section 10 (2)(vii) of Income Tax Act, 1922 and observed that such income is notionally regarded as profit in the year

SHARP BUSINESS SYSTEM THR. FINANCE DIRECTOR MR. YOSHIHISA MIZUNO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III N.D

The appeals are hereby disposed of in terms of

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA

additional grounds of appeal, one of which related to depreciation on intangible assets like intellectual property rights and non-compete fee. Assessee contended that assessing officer had not granted depreciation on intangible assets as well as on non-compete fee. It may be mentioned that assessee had paid Rs. 180 crores as non- compete fee during acquisition of software development

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX-I,NEW DELHI vs. VATIKA TOWNSHIP P.LTD

Appeals of the assessees are allowed deleting the surcharge levied by the

addition to the regular assessment in respect of each previous year included in the block period; (b) the total undisclosed income relating to the block period shall not include the income assessed in any regular assessment as income of such block period; (c) the income assessed in this Chapter shall not be included in the regular assessment of any previous

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. M/S. HOOGHLY MILLS CO. LTD

The appeal is allowed

depreciation on the sum under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT (Appeal) as well as the tribunal allowed the assessee’s claim and their orders were upheld by the High Court by the impugned judgment. Learned counsel for the appellant contended in this appeal that the expenditure on the taking over the gratuity liability of the employees

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,CHENNAI vs. M/S ALAGENDRAN FINANCE LTD

depreciation allowance" in Section 147 after the conditions for reassessment are satisfied, is only relatable to the preceding expression in Clauses (a) and (b) viz., "escaped assessment". The term "escaped assessment" includes both "non- assessment" as well as "under assessment". Income is said to have "escaped assessment" within the http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 8 meaning

M/S. VIKRAM CEMENT vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, INDORE

depreciation under section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), or as revenue expenditure under any other provisions of the said Income-tax Act, in respect of that part of the value of capital http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 21 goods which represents the amount of specified duty on such capital goods