BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

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.

6 results for “depreciation”+ Section 271(1)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai878Delhi870Ahmedabad259Bangalore181Chennai104Kolkata86Jaipur81Pune72Chandigarh58Hyderabad56Raipur50Indore35Surat32Lucknow26Visakhapatnam24Amritsar20SC11Nagpur9Rajkot8Cochin7Guwahati6Dehradun6Karnataka6Telangana6Agra6Patna5Ranchi5Allahabad4Cuttack4Jodhpur4Varanasi4Panaji2Jabalpur2S. B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Calcutta1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 2(22)(e)5Section 2715Addition to Income5Section 1454Section 271(1)(c)3Depreciation3Penalty3Section 44A2Section 271(1)2Comparables/TP

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

b) 54/Agra/2015, dated 19.05.2017. “Mak Data (P) Ltd. vs. CIT”, Civil Appeal No.9772/2013 (SC). (c) “Gujarat State Financial Services Ltd. vs. ACIT”, in ITA (d) Nos.2078/Ahd/2006 & 2526/Ahd/206. “M/s K.P. Madhusudananan vs. CIT”, Civil Appeal No. (e) 6465/2000 (SC). “CIT Ltd.”, (f) vs. Zoom Communications Pvt. ITA No.07/2010(Del) (H.C.). “CIT vs. HCIL Kalindee Arsspl”, ITA No.480/2012, Delhi High (g) Court

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

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

2
ITA 118/AGR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

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

b) 54/Agra/2015, dated 19.05.2017. “Mak Data (P) Ltd. vs. CIT”, Civil Appeal No.9772/2013 (SC). (c) “Gujarat State Financial Services Ltd. vs. ACIT”, in ITA (d) Nos.2078/Ahd/2006 & 2526/Ahd/206. “M/s K.P. Madhusudananan vs. CIT”, Civil Appeal No. (e) 6465/2000 (SC). “CIT Ltd.”, (f) vs. Zoom Communications Pvt. ITA No.07/2010(Del) (H.C.). “CIT vs. HCIL Kalindee Arsspl”, ITA No.480/2012, Delhi High (g) Court

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

depreciation as well as interest paid on borrowings are deemed to have been already given full effect to and no further deduction under these sections is allowable to the assessee. In view of the foregoing expressed provisions of section 44AD, this ground of the assessee is hereby rejected. 6. Ground No. 7(b) relates to treatment of interest income

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

depreciation as well as interest paid on borrowings are deemed to have been already given full effect to and no further deduction under these sections is allowable to the assessee. In view of the foregoing expressed provisions of section 44AD, this ground of the assessee is hereby rejected. 6. Ground No. 7(b) relates to treatment of interest income

A.C.I.T.-4(1), AGRA vs. M/S ROGER INDUSTRIES LTD., AGRA

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 266/AGR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra05 Oct 2018AY 2008-09
Section 14ASection 2Section 2(22)(e)

b) Admission of additional evidence in the form of collaboration agreement. 4. Briefly, the fact as per record are that the AO made addition of Rs.69,91,127/-, on account of deemed dividend since he found that the assesse company had received certain amountsfrom M/s. Euro Safety Footwear (P) Ltd. and the same attracted the provisions contained in section

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is partly

ITA 342/AGR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

depreciation disallowance on fixed assets. The perusal of the impugned assessment order would reveal that the ld. Assessing Officer while considering the net profit rate of the assessee has given a comparative analysis of the turnover and profits of the appellant for the three assessment years as under: A.Y. Sales (Rs.) GP (Rs) G.P. Rate NP(Rs.) N.P. Rate