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.

2 results for “depreciation”+ Section 8Oclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5Bangalore4Jaipur3Chennai3Hyderabad3Ahmedabad2Delhi2Kolkata1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 14A5Section 143(3)2Disallowance2

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD. ( ERSTWHILE RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED),BARODA vs. THE ACIT,CENT.CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 702/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT-D.R
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 37(1)Section 92C

8O-IB and 80-1C of the Act. 5.2 The AO grossly erred in stating that Appellant had not submitted balance sheet and profit and loss and hence was not eligible to claim deduction as per S. 80IA(7) of the Act r.w.r. 18BBB(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, without appreciating that revised certificate in Form 10CCB

M/S. UNIVERSAL MEDICAP LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

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

ITA 155/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri Nimit Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 14Section 14ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271

section 14 A envisage that when such expenses related to exempt income cannot be quantified incurred on administrative such as salary, bank charges, office expenditure & ancillary expenses grouped under such administrative cost shall be quantified by way of formula laid down under Rule 8D of I. T. Rules 1962. Hence, the reply of the assessee is not acceptable in view