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

14 (1954) 25 ITR 265 15 (1999) 239 ITR 775 42 14.12. In the context of the Act, more particularly Section 32 thereof, there is no similar provision which specifically lays down that a right which is not capable of being put to use like the right acquired on payment of non-compete fee is nonetheless eligible for depreciation

UDAIPUR SAHKARI UPBOKTA THOK BHANDER LD. vs. COMMR.OF INCOME TAX

10 of the Finance Act, 1955. Section 14(3) when originally introduced was, however, in a different form and it read as follows : "14. (3) The tax shall not be payable by a co-operative society, including a co-operative society carrying on the business of banking - (i) in respect of profits and gains of business carried

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

10 AIR 1967 SC 1437 = (1967) 3 SCR 181 11 (2008) 9 SCC 622 13 specifically made applicable w.e.f. April 1, 2002 and was, therefore, prospective in nature. In this behalf, he referred to three High Court judgments rendered by Kerala High Court, Madras High Court and Punjab & Haryana High Court which had taken the view as projected

SUNDARESH BHATT vs. CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

depreciation. From the viewpoint of creditors, a good realisation can generally be obtained if the firm is sold as a going concern. Hence, when delays induce liquidation, there is value destruction. Further, even in liquidation, the realisation is lower when there are delays. Hence, delays cause value destruction. Thus, achieving a high recovery rate is primarily about identifying and combating

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

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

depreciation under sub-section (2) of section 32 shall not be set off against the undisclosed income determined in the block assessment under this Chapter, but may be carried forward for being set off in the regular assessments. Civil Appeal No.________ of 2014 & connected matters Page 17 of 57 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 540 of 2009) Page

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX vs. M/S SAFARI RETREATS PRIVATE LIMITED

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

10. It is submitted that even though sub-Section (5) of Section 17 starts with the non-obstante clause, it cannot be said that the legislature intended to override Section 16(1) in its entirety. It is submitted that the non-obstante clause in Section 17(5) cannot cut down the construction or restrict the scope of operation of Section

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SHIMLA vs. M/S AARHAM SOFTRONICS

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

depreciation in any year), as on the first day of the previous year in which the substantial expansion is undertaken. 8. This section makes special provisions in respect of certain undertakings or enterprises in certain special category States. Section 80-IC was 10 inserted by the Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f. Civil Appeal No. 7208 OF 2018 & Ors. Page

M/S. VIJAY INDUSTRIES vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are allowed

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

10 of the Act. 8) Section 14 of the Act is the next provision which is relevant for these appeals. It is the first provision in Chapter IV which is titled ‘computation of total income’ and, obviously, contains the provision for computation of total income. Section 14 enumerates Civil Appeal Nos. 1581-1582 of 2005 a/w. Connected matters Page

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

Appeals are hereby dismissed

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

14. Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have received the due consideration of the Court. 15. Since the core issue is relatable to Section 80-IA of the Act, it would be apposite to advert to and analyse the aforesaid provision. Section 80-IA deals with deductions in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprises

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. A.R. ENTERPRISES

14 Page 15 JUDGMENT section 144 and section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply;...” [Emphasis supplied] 17. Section 158B of the Act, which encompasses the crux of the issue, reads as follows: “Definitions. 158B. In this Chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, - (a) "block period" means the previous years relevant to ten assessment years preceding the previous year

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE

The appeal is allowed

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

depreciation on permanent assets and securities. iii. The Commission’s order dated 11.12.2000, makes multiple references to the Report of the Commissioner, as required under Section 245D (1). Therefore, we find no substance in the submission of the Ld. ASG appearing on behalf of the Revenue that the procedure contemplated under Section 245D was not followed

PRIDE FORAMER S.A. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

section further provided such depreciation allowance can be carried forward if the business or profession for which the depreciation allowance was originally computed, continued in the previous year relevant to the assessment year in question. It may be apposite to note that the said proviso has since been omitted by the Finance Act, 2001 w.e.f. 1st April, 2002. Page

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

Section 10(1) of the 1961 Act read with Rule 8, 40 per cent of the business income derived from the sale of tea grown and manufactured in India by the assessee was liable to tax. In the above judgment of the Supreme Court, the Court was concerned with the world income, in this case we are concerned with

M/S. TECHNO SHARES & STOCKS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV

10,77,276/-, the same as was in the original return of income. The main reason for reopening of assessment under Section 147 was the claim of depreciation by the assessee on BSE membership card amounting to Rs. 23,65,000/-. The claim of depreciation of the assessee was based on Section 32(1)(ii) which stood inserted by Finance

M/S MANGALORE GANESH BEEDI WORKS vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MYSORE

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms

10 ‘In respect of depreciation of buildings, machinery, plant or furniture owned, wholly or partly, by the assessee and used for the purposes of the business or profession, the following deductions shall, subject to the provisions of section 34, be allowed –’ 13 Page 14

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

The appeals are allowed; the impugned

10 JUDGMENT measurement of wearing out through consumption, or use, or effluxion of time. Paton has in his Account's Handbook (3rd Edn.) observed that depreciation is an out- of-pocket cost as any other costs. He has further observed-the depreciation charge is merely the periodic operating aspect of fixed asset costs. 13. The provision on depreciation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S WOODWARD GOVERNOR INDIA P. LTD

depreciation and allowances are dealt with in Section 32. Therefore, Parliament has used the expression “any expenditure” in Section 37 to cover both. Therefore, the expression “expenditure” as used in Section 37 may, in 11 the circumstances of a particular case, cover an amount which is really a “loss” even though the said amount has not gone out from

M/S. SOUTHERN TECHNOLOGIES LTD. vs. JOINT COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, COIMBATORE

14 to 59. It is not an assessment Section. Section 145 helps to arrive at taxable total income. It nowhere indicates that the net profit arrived at shall be by adopting the accounting standards of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI). It is the 1998 Directions which inter alia states that NBFC shall not recognize any income from