Search: depreciation | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

Search Judgments
Browse by Bench
Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

7 results for “depreciation”+ Block Assessmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,540 Delhi1,189 Chennai544 Bangalore513 Kolkata389 Ahmedabad375 Hyderabad192 Pune144 Jaipur115 Chandigarh110 Raipur109 Karnataka77 Amritsar54 Cuttack53 Indore38 Visakhapatnam35 Guwahati34 Cochin33 Surat31 Nagpur29 SC22 Lucknow20 Rajkot14 Telangana12 Allahabad10 Ranchi9 Agra7 Jabalpur6 Dehradun6 Jodhpur5 Panaji4 Kerala2 Calcutta2 Punjab & Haryana1 Rajasthan1 D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 Orissa1 Patna1

Key Topics

Addition to Income6 Section 2715 Section 405 Section 1454 Depreciation4 Section 44A3 Section 271(1)(c)3 Penalty3 Section 43B2 Section 37(1)

M/S SHIVHARE ROADLINES,GWALIOR vs. JT. C.I.T., RANGE-2, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 313/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra31 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 139(1)Section 37(1)Section 43B

block of asset being trucks and trailers by calculating depreciation @ 30%, however the AO in his assessment order has curtailed

DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), GWALIOR vs. SWASTIK ROADLINES P LTD, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is treated as partly allowed for

ITA 146/AGR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra08 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

2

Section 271(1)2

Bench:

Section 201(1)Section 40

assessment proceedings, assessee provided the details of purchase of New Commercial Vehicles (Trucks) with Truck No. Registrati on No./ Chesis No., Date of Regi strati on and amount capitalized. On bei ng asked, the appel 1 ant has also suppli ed the copies of purchase Invoice, Ownership Track Record (showing Chesis No & Registration date etc.) and copy of RC (Certificate

M/S GINNI FILAMENTS LTD.,MATHURA vs. A.C.I.T., RANGE-3, MATHURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 173/AGR/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 234BSection 44A

Depreciation adjustment - 0.85 ----------- ----------- (0.39) 22.93) ----------- ----------- Further, it was submitted that the assessee has been consistently following this policy in the earlier years also and has claimed as allowable expenses u/s. 37 of the Act. 18 14. On the other hand, the ld.DR had drawn our attention to page 12 & 13 of the CIT(A) order where

MR. PRAMOD KUMAR KHANDELWAL,AGRA vs. DY.C.I.T.-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated

ITA 201/AGR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 145Section 271(1)Section 44A

assessment proceedings AO would have carried out detailed investigation in respect of purchases, sundry creditors and other expenses, as was done in the A.Y. 2010-11. It is a matter of fact that assessee has not been maintaining proper bills and vouchers, hence by agreeing to such addition, assessee created the circumstances to block the further investigations in the case

MR. PRAMOD KUMAR KHANDELWAL,AGRA vs. DY.C.I.T.-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated

ITA 200/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 145Section 271(1)Section 44A

assessment proceedings AO would have carried out detailed investigation in respect of purchases, sundry creditors and other expenses, as was done in the A.Y. 2010-11. It is a matter of fact that assessee has not been maintaining proper bills and vouchers, hence by agreeing to such addition, assessee created the circumstances to block the further investigations in the case

SH. SACHIN ARORA,MATHURA vs. I.T.O.-3(4), MATHURA

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 118/AGR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Block of Assets. The aforesaid amount was added back to the income of the assessee, with its consent. It was further noticed that another sum of Rs. 1 Lakh had been paid under the head "Income Tax Paid", in the aforesaid Schedule relating to Administrative and other Expenses. The assessee claimed that due to oversight, this amount was not added

SMT. SARLA DEVI,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD 1(1), ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 70/AGR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

Block of Assets. The aforesaid amount was added back to the income of the assessee, with its consent. It was further noticed that another sum of Rs. 1 Lakh had been paid under the head "Income Tax Paid", in the aforesaid Schedule relating to I.T.A No. 70/Agra/2017 14 Administrative and other Expenses. The assessee claimed that due to oversight, this