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.

23 results for “depreciation”+ Reopening of Assessmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai601Delhi320Chennai230Bangalore135Jaipur125Raipur54Pune53Ahmedabad50Kolkata50Hyderabad46Indore44Chandigarh31Rajkot27Visakhapatnam26Cochin23Amritsar23Lucknow20Guwahati19Jodhpur14Cuttack14Surat13SC12Ranchi4Panaji4Patna3Agra2Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 14868Section 12A45Section 143(3)32Section 25024Addition to Income21Section 35A20Section 80I20Section 1120Disallowance18Depreciation

KUNDAN JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,GANDHI CHOWK, SADAR BAZAR, MUKTSAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), MUKTSAR, MUKTSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 284/ASR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, A. R
Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 69A

reopening of the assessment in the present case was not valid, accordingly, the same is quashed. Fortune Metaliks Limited vs. DCIT, ITA No. 1090/Chd/2019 dated 12.01.2021-CHD Trib "7. We have heard both the parties. We find merit in the contention of the Id. counsel for the assessee that the reassessment proceedings undertaken by the AO in the present case

Showing 1–20 of 23 · Page 1 of 2

15
Section 14713
Deduction13

M/S CITI PLAZA,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 3(1), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 356/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 250

reopening were for 1948-49 on 5th December 1957. The assessee therefore filed a Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground that the notice dated 5th December 1957 seeking to re-open the assessment for Assessment Year 1948-49 is time barred under Section 34 of the Income Tax Act, 1922. The revenue contended that

SHRI ARNESH KUMAR SHAKAR EX. MLA,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, DASUYA

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 6/ASR/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54Section 54F

depreciation as also the directions issued by the Dy. Commissioner under section 144A of the Act dated 26-10-1998 cannot be sustained. The same are hereby vacated. The Assessing Officer will now proceed with the assessment under section 147 in accordance with law. For the sake of clarification, we may repeat that nothing observed by us in this case

M/S.PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 306/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 250

reopened the assessment years by persuasion of notice u/s 148 of the Act, had treated the assessee as an AOPand had disallowed the claim u/s 11. The assessee was denied the benefit claim u/s 11 of the Act. In ITA No. 581/Asr/2015 for A.Y. 2008-09 only the expenses are disallowed amount of Rs.4,75,269/- depreciation

M/S PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES,,JALANDHAR vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 581/ASR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 250

reopened the assessment years by persuasion of notice u/s 148 of the Act, had treated the assessee as an AOPand had disallowed the claim u/s 11. The assessee was denied the benefit claim u/s 11 of the Act. In ITA No. 581/Asr/2015 for A.Y. 2008-09 only the expenses are disallowed amount of Rs.4,75,269/- depreciation

M/S. PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 303/ASR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 250

reopened the assessment years by persuasion of notice u/s 148 of the Act, had treated the assessee as an AOPand had disallowed the claim u/s 11. The assessee was denied the benefit claim u/s 11 of the Act. In ITA No. 581/Asr/2015 for A.Y. 2008-09 only the expenses are disallowed amount of Rs.4,75,269/- depreciation

M/S.PUNJAB INSTITURE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 304/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 250

reopened the assessment years by persuasion of notice u/s 148 of the Act, had treated the assessee as an AOPand had disallowed the claim u/s 11. The assessee was denied the benefit claim u/s 11 of the Act. In ITA No. 581/Asr/2015 for A.Y. 2008-09 only the expenses are disallowed amount of Rs.4,75,269/- depreciation

M/S.PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 305/ASR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 250

reopened the assessment years by persuasion of notice u/s 148 of the Act, had treated the assessee as an AOPand had disallowed the claim u/s 11. The assessee was denied the benefit claim u/s 11 of the Act. In ITA No. 581/Asr/2015 for A.Y. 2008-09 only the expenses are disallowed amount of Rs.4,75,269/- depreciation

SMT. BHARTI SINGH ,AMRITSAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR

Appeals of the appellant are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 222/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal, Adv. &
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 151

Assessment Years under consideration were reopened on identical reasons on account of claim of bogus expenses claim whereas the additions were made on account of sundry creditors, depreciation

SMT. BHARTI SINGH,AMRITSAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR

Appeals of the appellant are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 221/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal, Adv. &
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 151

Assessment Years under consideration were reopened on identical reasons on account of claim of bogus expenses claim whereas the additions were made on account of sundry creditors, depreciation

SMT. BHARTI SINGH ,AMRITSAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR

Appeals of the appellant are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 226/ASR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal, Adv. &
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 151

Assessment Years under consideration were reopened on identical reasons on account of claim of bogus expenses claim whereas the additions were made on account of sundry creditors, depreciation

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FILL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 290/ASR/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

reopened on period of limitation as argued by the ld. counsel for the assessee under section 149 of the Act. As regards the 56 principles laid down by the various courts of law, the issue is with regard to formation of industrial undertaking has been examined in the initial assessment year and once the claim has been allowed especially under

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FILL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 291/ASR/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

reopened on period of limitation as argued by the ld. counsel for the assessee under section 149 of the Act. As regards the 56 principles laid down by the various courts of law, the issue is with regard to formation of industrial undertaking has been examined in the initial assessment year and once the claim has been allowed especially under

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FIL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 292/ASR/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

reopened on period of limitation as argued by the ld. counsel for the assessee under section 149 of the Act. As regards the 56 principles laid down by the various courts of law, the issue is with regard to formation of industrial undertaking has been examined in the initial assessment year and once the claim has been allowed especially under

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FIL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 293/ASR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

reopened on period of limitation as argued by the ld. counsel for the assessee under section 149 of the Act. As regards the 56 principles laid down by the various courts of law, the issue is with regard to formation of industrial undertaking has been examined in the initial assessment year and once the claim has been allowed especially under

M/S FIL INDUSTRIES LTD,SRINAGAR vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 417/ASR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

reopened on period of limitation as argued by the ld. counsel for the assessee under section 149 of the Act. As regards the 56 principles laid down by the various courts of law, the issue is with regard to formation of industrial undertaking has been examined in the initial assessment year and once the claim has been allowed especially under

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FIL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 294/ASR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

reopened on period of limitation as argued by the ld. counsel for the assessee under section 149 of the Act. As regards the 56 principles laid down by the various courts of law, the issue is with regard to formation of industrial undertaking has been examined in the initial assessment year and once the claim has been allowed especially under

M/S FIL INDUSTRIES LTD,SRINAGAR vs. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 255/ASR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

reopened on period of limitation as argued by the ld. counsel for the assessee under section 149 of the Act. As regards the 56 principles laid down by the various courts of law, the issue is with regard to formation of industrial undertaking has been examined in the initial assessment year and once the claim has been allowed especially under

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FILL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 289/ASR/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

reopened on period of limitation as argued by the ld. counsel for the assessee under section 149 of the Act. As regards the 56 principles laid down by the various courts of law, the issue is with regard to formation of industrial undertaking has been examined in the initial assessment year and once the claim has been allowed especially under

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. FIL INDUSTRIES LTD, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 470/ASR/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

reopened on period of limitation as argued by the ld. counsel for the assessee under section 149 of the Act. As regards the 56 principles laid down by the various courts of law, the issue is with regard to formation of industrial undertaking has been examined in the initial assessment year and once the claim has been allowed especially under