“Section 2(11)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(11)198 judgments

PANKAJ SETHI L/H BRIJ MOHAN SETHI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(5), NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed as premature at this\nstage in above terms subject to all just exceptions

ITA 9006/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 159Section 2(11)Section 2(29)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,\nDELHI BENCH: ‘F' NEW DELHI\nBEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

M/S R. S. SHETYE & BROS,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), PANAJI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 37/PAN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. No.37/Pan/2023 (A.Y.2016-17) R.S.Shetye & Bros, Vs Acit 1(1), Flat.No.14, 1 St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, . Trionara Apartments, Edc, Patto, New Muncipal Market, Panjim Panaji- Goa-403001. Goa-403001. Pan .No.Aabfr9785N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 3

reach the status of being a scrap. The capital asset may further fall into two class by their very attributes in term of section 2(11) of the Act which defines the term 'block of assets' means a fixed assets classified into (a) tangible and (b) intangible assets. The intangible ... other business or commercial rights of similar nature. Perhaps as a safeguard measure Explanation 3 to section 32(1) is pari-materia of section 2(11) to cover both tangible and intangible assets for depreciation. 37. Section 32 of the Act on the other hand, allows a deduction for depreciation

BANDEKAR BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED,VASCO-DA-GAMA, GOA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI, GOA

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 38/PAN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2013-14 Bandekar Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Post Box No. 11, Suvarna Bandekar Bldg., Swatantra Path, Vasco-Da-Gama Goa-403802 Pan: Aaacb5502B . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Pramod & Mr Shriniwas Deshpande [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Mr M Satish & Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 12/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-

For Appellant: Mr Pramod & Mr Shriniwas Deshpande [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish & Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(14)Section 246ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 37(1)

submission of the Revenue, the Ld. Jr Deshpande propped for higher depreciation by categorising it into an intangible asset within clause (b) of section 2(11) of the Act. 10. We have heard the rival party’s submission & arguments, subject to rule 18 of Income Tax Appellate Rules, 1963 [‘ITAT ... reach the status of being a scrap. The capital asset may further fall into two class by their very attributes in term of section 2(11) of the Act which defines the term 'block of assets' means a fixed assets classified into (a) tangible and (b) intangible assets. The intangible

TRENT LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5165/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 2(11)Section 250Section 32Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(ii)

assets and the balance amount of Rs. 44.02 crores was allocated to goodwill purchased.\n6. The assessee also referred to the provisions of section 2(11) and section 32(1) of the Act and contended that goodwill is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under the expression \"any other business ... introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, whereby “goodwill of a business or profession" was excluded from the definition of \"block of assets\" under section 2(11) of the Act with effect from 01.04.2021, and depreciation on goodwill was expressly disallowed from assessment year 2021-22 onwards, even where such goodwill

SHRI JAGBIR,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 4201/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 159Section 2(11)Section 2(29)

shall be at liberty to file a fresh appeal as and when he either satisfies the statutory conditions of a “legal representative” under section 2(11) (supra) or he is proceeded against by the department 2 | P a g e under section 159 of the Act, whichever is earlier. Ordered

OM PRAKASH ,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 2 (3), NOIDA

Appeal is dismissed as premature at this stage in above terms subject to all just exceptions

ITA 8824/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 8824/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Om Prakash(Deceased), Vs Income Tax Officer, X-3199A, Gali No. 2, Raghbar Pura Ward-2(3), No. 2, Gandhi Nagar, Noida, Delhi-110031 Uttar Pradesh-201307 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aqapp8677N Assessee By: Sh. Amar Nath, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.01.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1075543446(1) Dated 08.04.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Amar Nath, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 159Section 2(11)Section 2(29)

same or he is the intermeddler thereof; as the case may be, as per section 2(29) of the Act read with section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure defining such a “legal representative” in very terms. There is further no material on record that the appellate herein ... indeed be at liberty to file a fresh appeal as and when he either satisfies the statutory conditions of a “legal representative” under section 2(11) (supra) or he is proceeded against by the department under section 159 of the Act; whichever is earlier. Ordered accordingly. 3 Om Prakash

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 1, CHENNAI vs. FL SMITH PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHIPURAM

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA

ITA 1763/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 43(1)

case of\nI & B Seeds (P.) Ltd. (supra) held that by way of amendment through Finance\nAct, 2021 clause (b) of Section 2(11) of the Act was amended and the goodwill\nof the business or profession is excluded from the block of assets comprised\nin intangible assets. This amendment

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME CORPORATE CIRCLE 1-1, CHENNAI vs. FL SMIDTH PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHIPURAM

ITA 1731/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 43(1)

ASSISSTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1 1, CHENNAI vs. FL SMITH PRIVATE LIMITED, KANCHIPURAM

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA

ITA 1682/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 43(1)

LATE SH. MAHA SINGH TH. LEGAL HEIR BIJENDER SINGH,SONIPAT vs. ITO, WARD - 3, SONIPAT

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4568/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Naveen Chandraita No. 4568/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Late Sh. Maha Singh Th. Legal Heir Vs Income Tax Officer, Bijender Singh, Ward-3, Vill. Moi Majri, Tehsil & Distt. Sonipat, Sonipat, Haryana-131002 Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Jtips2811F Assessee By : Sh. Saurav Rohtagi, Ca & Sh. Rajat Mittal, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18, Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023–24/1060398128(1) Dated 01.02.2024, In Proceedings U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Rohtagi, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 159Section 2(29)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Naveen

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7294/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 32(1)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n“H” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nSHRI

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7393/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 32(1)

{"clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n“H” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nSHRI

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 577/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 32(1)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n“H” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nSHRI

THERMO FISHER SCIENFTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1236/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 32(1)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n“H” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nSHRI

JCIT CENT. CIR. - 1(4), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1561/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar / Ms SukanyaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR

Section 153CSection 250Section 43BSection 80I

note certain provisions of the Act that are relevant to the issue at hand. The term “block of assets” is defined in section 2(11) of the Act, as under:- "block of assets" means a group of assets falling within a class of assets comprising— (a) tangible assets, being buildings

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. - 1(4), MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1056/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Section 153CSection 250Section 43BSection 80I

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n“G” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG, PRESIDENT &\nMS

PRATIMA REDDY MUTHU,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-14(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1310/HYD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1310/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2010-2011 Pratima Reddy Muthu, Hyderabad – 500 034. The Acit, Circle-14(1), Vs. Hyderabad – 500 004. Telangana. Pan Aaopm8335J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri Yogesh K Jagia & Sri Amit Sood, Advocates. राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 24.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri Yogesh K Jagia And Sri Amit Sood, AdvocatesFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 159(1)Section 159(6)Section 171(1)Section 2(11)Section 2(29)Section 250Section 28

order upholding assessment order, failed to appreciate that determination of legal representative under section 2(29) of Income Tax Act, 1961 read with section 2(11) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 is sine qua non for completion of assessment. In absence of such determination, assessment order passed

ESTATE OF VANDRAVAN P SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 5403/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 159Section 35A

such proceedings are continued against the deceased.\n9.5 The term \"Legal Representative\" is defined under Section 2(29)\nof the Act read with Section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure,\n1908. It encompasses a person who in law represents the estate of a\ndeceased person and includes

ESTATE OF VANDRAVAN P SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 5402/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Ms. Shivani ShahFor Respondent: Mr. Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 159Section 35A

ESTATE OF VANDRAVAN P SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 5401/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Respondent: Ms. Shivani Shah

Section 147Section 148Section 35A

Legal Representative" is defined under Section 2(29) The term "Legal Representative" is defined under Section 2(29) of the Act read with Section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure, of the Act read with Section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure, of the Act read ... with Section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It encompasses a person who in law represents the estate of a 1908. It encompasses a person who in law represents the estate of a 1908. It encompasses a person who in law represents the estate of a deceased

Showing 1–20 of 198 · Page 1 of 10

...