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.

5 results for “depreciation”+ Section 56(2)(viib)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi59Mumbai50Chandigarh43Bangalore21Hyderabad10Kolkata8Jaipur7Pune6Ahmedabad5Chennai5Jodhpur5Raipur4Indore3Amritsar2Cochin1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 56(2)(viib)8Section 43B6Depreciation5Addition to Income5Section 143(3)4Section 40A(3)4Disallowance4Section 115J3Section 50C2Section 36

JAYSHRI PROPACK PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1846/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt.Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2015-16 Jayshri Propack P. Ltd. Vs. Acit, Cir.2(1)(2) Plot No.487/A88 Ahmedabad. B/H. Sushma Namkeen Tajpur Road, Changodar Taluka : Sanand, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaccj 159 J 0 अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay R. Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05/05/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/07/2022

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 250(6)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

section 56(2)(viib) of the Act, and the addition made in this regard amounted to Rs.45,48,583/- ,which after 2 adjusting brought-forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation

2
Deduction2
TDS2

GUJARAT INFRAPIPES PVT. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 813/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR and Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 50C

depreciation claimed on software license, without appreciating the fact that the assessee had not purchased any software, only license to use it was purchased by the assessee company, thereby contravening the provisions of Appendix-I of IT Rules 1962. 3. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend or alter the above grounds as may be deemed necessary

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. M/S. GUJARAT INFRA PIPES PVT. LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 987/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR and Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 50C

depreciation claimed on software license, without appreciating the fact that the assessee had not purchased any software, only license to use it was purchased by the assessee company, thereby contravening the provisions of Appendix-I of IT Rules 1962. 3. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend or alter the above grounds as may be deemed necessary

M/S. UNIWRAP SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(4)., VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2555/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2555/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S.Uniwrap Systems P.Ltd. Ito, Ward-2(1)(4) Plot No.383, Gidc Vs Baroda. Manusar, Tal: Savli Vadodara 391 175. Pan : Aabcu 0130 H अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil R. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri O.P. Pathak, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Anil R. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Pathak, Sr.DR
Section 56(2)(viib)

depreciation amounting to Rs.4,190/-. The ld.counsel for the assessee did not press this ground of appeal, hence, it is dismissed. 3. In ground no.1, the assessee has taken three sub-grounds. It has pleaded that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,42,640/- under section 56(2)(viib

V.S. META CAST PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 2950/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2014-15 V.S. Metacast P.Lttd. Dcit, Cir.4(1)(2) A-201, Mondeal Square Vs Ahmedabad. Opp: Honest Restaurant Prahaladnagar. Pan : Aaecv 1729 L

For Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 36Section 56(2)(viib)

depreciation claim on DG set of Rs.99,473/-, (iii) addition of Rs.6,73,600/- under section 56(2)(viib) r.w.r