Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.27 seconds)
Cimmco Birla Ltd., New Delhi vs Department Of Income Tax on 23 July, 2010 cites

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Green Valley Agro Mills Ltd. & Ors. on 20 July, 2010

9. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of the CIT (A) vide which it has been held that the disallowance of depreciation could not 6 ITA No.4374/Del/2010 be made on the basis of concept of block of assets and his decision is in accordance with the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the aforementioned case of CIT vs. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. (supra). We decline to interfere.
Delhi High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 1 - A K Sikri - Full Document

The Liquidators Of Pursa Limited vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bihar on 9 February, 1954

2. The assessee has been assessed at a loss of `20,21,52,677/- against the returned loss of ` 21,31,70,437/-. An addition of ` 89,75,310/-, inter alia was made on account of disallowance of depreciation on plant and machinery. It was found by the Assessing Officer that the plant of the assessee at Bharatpur and New Delhi were declared under lock out w.e.f. 13th November, 2000 and 8th December, 2000 respectively and they were still locked out. Therefore, the Assessing Officer denied the benefit of depreciation on the machinery pertaining to the plants at Bharatpur and New Delhi. The Assessing Officer has relied upon the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. vs. CIT (1954) 25 ITR 265 (SC) and in the case of CIT vs Oriental Coal Co. Ltd. (1994) 206 ITR 682 (Cal).
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 142 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Oriental Coal Co. Ltd. on 4 January, 1994

2. The assessee has been assessed at a loss of `20,21,52,677/- against the returned loss of ` 21,31,70,437/-. An addition of ` 89,75,310/-, inter alia was made on account of disallowance of depreciation on plant and machinery. It was found by the Assessing Officer that the plant of the assessee at Bharatpur and New Delhi were declared under lock out w.e.f. 13th November, 2000 and 8th December, 2000 respectively and they were still locked out. Therefore, the Assessing Officer denied the benefit of depreciation on the machinery pertaining to the plants at Bharatpur and New Delhi. The Assessing Officer has relied upon the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liquidators of Pursa Ltd. vs. CIT (1954) 25 ITR 265 (SC) and in the case of CIT vs Oriental Coal Co. Ltd. (1994) 206 ITR 682 (Cal).
Calcutta High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 27 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... vs Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. on 25 January, 1977

ii) CIT vs. Bharat Aluminium Co. Ltd., 187 Taxman 111 (Del) wherein it has been held that the expression "used for the purposes of business" when applied to block of assets would mean use of block of assets and not any specific building, machinery, plant or furniture in the said block of assets as individual assets have lost their identity after becoming inseparable part of the block asset.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 105 - P K Goswami - Full Document
1