COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MAHENDRA MILLS

The appeal is dismissed

8 of 21 head have to be computed. Section 10 deals with the computation of profits and gains of any business carried on by an assessee. Section 10(2) prescribes the allowances which have to be deducted before computing the profits and gains; one of the allowances is "depreciation", and this is provided under sub-clause (vi). Section 24 provides

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

depreciation is concerned, that was not mentioned therein. Thus, according to him, it is these two sub-sections which contained special provisions and except that, for computing the profits and gains of the business, Sections 30 to 43D had to be applied which would embrace Section 32 as well. 12 8) Counsel appearing in other appeals for the assessees made

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 12AA(1) of the IT Act, on 18.05.1979 and is engaged in the activity of promotion of the export of all kind of ready-made garments, knitwear, and garments made of leather, jute and hemp. It does not per se engage in any activity for profit, and its mandate is to ensure that Indian apparel manufacturers, are given forums

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

13. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel representing M/s. Piramal Glass Private Limited (formerly known as Piramal Glass Limited) submits that his client acknowledges that non-compete fee paid is not a revenue expenditure but a capital expenditure. However, the further contention is that as a capital expenditure, it is entitled to depreciation under Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. CORE HEALTH CARE LTD

Depreciation is not there in Section 36(1)(iii). That is why the legislature has used the words "unless the context otherwise requires". Hence, Explanation 8 has no relevancy to Section 36(1)(iii). It has relevancy to the aforementioned enumerated sections. Therefore, in our view Explanation 8 has no application to the facts of the present case. http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

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

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

depreciation of previous years under Section 32(2) of the Act?’ 5 Vide order dated 13.10.2008 in SLP(C) No. 4510 of 2008. Page 8 of 13

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

13. Analysing the above two charts, we find that at the end of computation the income chargeable to tax by applying Rule 8 comes to Rs.240. Under Illustration ‘A’, the normal depreciation is Rs.100 which is deductible from Rs.1000 being the income from sale of tea. On the other hand, under Illustration ‘B’, we have taken 40 per cent

M/S. G.K. CHOKSI & CO. vs. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, GUJARAT

8. The relevant provisions of Section 32 of the Act, as they existed at the relevant time, are reproduced below: "Section 32 - Depreciation (1) In respect of depreciation of buildings, machinery, plant or furniture owned by the assessee and used for the purposes of the business or profession, the following deductions shall, subject to the provisions of Section

M/S LIBERTY INDIA vs. COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,KARNAL

8 deduction under Section 80-IB on the duty remitted. 9. On behalf of the appellant(s) it was submitted that Section 80-IB was different from Section 80-I in the sense that under Section 80-IB, income derived from business of an industrial undertaking was admissible for deduction whereas under Section 80-I deduction was allowable to income

NECTAR BEVERAGES PVT. LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX

8 earlier been made in respect of any loss, expenditure or trading liability and subsequently the assessee has obtained or realized any amount towards such loss, expenditure or trading liability, Section 41(1) deems such realization/recoupment as assessee’s income for the year in which it is realized. Section 41(2) as it stood at the material time stated that

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

8. To answer the above question, we need to quote hereinbelow certain relevant provisions of the 1961 Act: 2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,— (14)“capital asset” means property of any kind held by an assessee, whether or not connected with his business or profession, but does not include— (i) any stock-in-trade, consumable stores

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

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

8 of 57 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 540 of 2009) Page 9 JUDGMENT year in which the search is initiated under Section 132 or the requisition is made under Section 132-A. In this case, the search and seizure took place on 06.10.2001. An order of block assessment in terms of Section 158BC was made in respect

M/S D. N. SINGH THROUGH PARTNER DUDHESHWAR NATH SINGH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH

depreciation under Section 32. 57. This Court is called upon to decide the ambit of the word ‘owner’ in section 69A in the facts before us. This Court agrees with the High Court that the concept of ‘owner’ cannot be divorced from the context in which the expression is employed. In the case of Jodha Mal (supra), the property undoubtedly

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

The appeals are allowed; the impugned

8 Page 9 JUDGMENT asset to the extent it has depreciated during the period of accounting relevant to the assessment year and as the value has, to that extent, been lost, the corresponding allowance for depreciation takes place. 11. Black’s Law Dictionary (5th Edn.) defines ‘depreciation’ to mean, inter alia: “A fall in value; reduction of worth. The deterioration

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

8 Page 9 JUDGMENT 11. Sections 132 and 132A of the Act incorporate provision of search, seizure and requisition which were resorted to for the conduct of search at the premises of M/s A.R. Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. For the evaluation of the material seized during the operation or proceedings under Sections 132 or 132A of the Act, as the case

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

Appeals are allowed

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

13. The principle of statutory construction invoked by Ms Ramachandran has no application in construing the expression “gross total income” in sub-section (1) of Section 80-P. In view of the express provision defining the said expression in Section 80-B(5) for the purpose of Chapter VI-A, there is no scope for construing the said expression differently

RAJASTHAN STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD JAIPUR vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (ASSESSMENT)

In the result, we allow the appeal, set aside the

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI

13:31:00 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified 2 The assessee is a Government Company as defined under Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. The assessee filed return on 30.12.1991 for the assessment year 1991-92 showing a loss amounting to Rs. (-)427,39,32,972/-. Due to a bonafide mistake the assessee claimed 100% depreciation