Search: depreciation

3 results for “depreciation”+ Section 43Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai76 Delhi35 Chennai29 Ahmedabad18 Pune12 Kolkata10 Visakhapatnam8 Bangalore8 SC6 Rajkot3 Chandigarh3 Amritsar3 Karnataka2 Allahabad2 Telangana2 Hyderabad2 Jaipur2 Nagpur1 Kerala1 Cochin1 Cuttack1 Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 406 Section 40A(3)4 Section 32(1)4 Section 684 Section 250(6)3 Section 43D3 Disallowance3 Addition to Income3 Section 143(3)2 Section 36(1)(iii)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-IV,, PATHANKOT vs. THE GURDASPUR CENTRAL CO. OPBANK LTD, GURDASPUR

In the result, the ground no

ITA 542/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meenaandsh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40Section 43D

depreciation of the capital expenditure should be allowed to the assessee in applicable rate. In relation to payment of the two Co- owners amount Rs.3,78,750/- the said addition is also deleted as each Co-owner is Rs. @ 12,500/- which is below the quantum of TDS. The violation of section 40(a)(ia) will not be accepted. Considering

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JAMMU vs. M/S. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO,, JAMMU ( J&K)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as well as the appeal filed the Revenue Department is dismissed and Cross Objection also stands disposed off

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-IV,, PATHANKOT vs. THE GURDASPUR CENTRAL CO. OPBANK LTD, GURDASPUR

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JAMMU vs. M/S. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO,, JAMMU ( J&K)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-IV,, PATHANKOT vs. THE GURDASPUR CENTRAL CO. OPBANK LTD, GURDASPUR

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JAMMU vs. M/S. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO,, JAMMU ( J&K)

M/S. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO.,,JAMMU vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (HQRS), JAMMU