Search: depreciation | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

45 results for “depreciation”+ Set Off of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,300 Delhi2,600 Bangalore1,129 Chennai1,123 Kolkata592 Ahmedabad457 Jaipur259 Hyderabad248 Karnataka197 Pune195 Raipur143 Chandigarh130 Indore97 Visakhapatnam71 Surat61 SC60 Lucknow56 Cochin49 Ranchi46 Amritsar45 Rajkot40 Telangana36 Cuttack30 Jodhpur28 Nagpur27 Guwahati22 Kerala16 Patna10 Calcutta10 Allahabad8 Panaji6 Jabalpur5 Dehradun5 Agra5 Varanasi5 Punjab & Haryana4 Orissa4 Rajasthan2 Tripura1 Gauhati1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Addition to Income41 Section 153A36 Deduction29 Section 143(3)24 Section 3624 Section 25023 Disallowance22 Section 35A20 Section 80I20 Section 143(1)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs. SHRI BHUPINDER SINGH. M/S NOVELTY SWEETS, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 196/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

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

set-off against the losses and unabsorbed depreciation and referred to the Memorandum explaining the provisions of Finance Bill, 2022 and mentioned

ISHAR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELPOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

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

ITA 686/ASR/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 686/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2022-23

Showing 1–20 of 45 · Page 1 of 3

17

Section 250(6)14

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 32(2)Section 72Section 72(3)

set-off of brought forward business losses ( other than speculative losses ) amounting to Rs.1.25 crore u/s 72, and unabsorbed depreciation

M/S SHARP CHUKS AND MACHINES PRIVATE LIMITED ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

The appeal of the assessee is disposed of in the terms as above

ITA 169/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Kapoor, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Ratinder Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 1Section 115BSection 153(3)Section 250(6)Section 44ASection 69Section 69A

set off business losses suffered by the assessee out of the surrendered income except the element of cash surrendered. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. No.-1. T. A. No. 1080 /Chd/ 2014 (assessment year 2011-12). 5. Per Contra, the learned DR stands by the impugned order. 6. Heard both the sides, perused the material on record, impugned order

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 104/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned. 7 In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income to the tune of Rs.4,32,80,900/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act Keeping in the view the above

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1),FEROZEPUR, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned. 7 In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income to the tune of Rs.4,32,80,900/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act Keeping in the view the above

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. MEASAGE BHAGWATI LACTO VEGETARIAN EXPORTS (P) LIMITED, FEROZEPUR CANTT

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

ITA 1/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sh. Rohit Mehra, CIT DR

Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)

Loss account, depreciation was claimed at the rates provided in the Companies Law at Rs. 1,17,10,417/-, whereas in the computation of total income, the same was calculated at Rs. 3,55,17,746/- and it was also stated that the assessee has claimed bad debts amounting to Rs. 1,98,63,037/- being debts due from

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

losses. It will be further seen that subsidy so provided is only to promote setting up of the cold storages and is not a reimbursement or agreement to meet the cost of the asset acquired I.T.A. Nos.288 to 294/Asr/2015 48 by the appellant company. This fact would be evident from clause (iv) of the Scheme which provides that assessee would

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

losses. It will be further seen that subsidy so provided is only to promote setting up of the cold storages and is not a reimbursement or agreement to meet the cost of the asset acquired I.T.A. Nos.288 to 294/Asr/2015 48 by the appellant company. This fact would be evident from clause (iv) of the Scheme which provides that assessee would

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 471/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

losses. It will be further seen that subsidy so provided is only to promote setting up of the cold storages and is not a reimbursement or agreement to meet the cost of the asset acquired I.T.A. Nos.288 to 294/Asr/2015 48 by the appellant company. This fact would be evident from clause (iv) of the Scheme which provides that assessee would

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

losses. It will be further seen that subsidy so provided is only to promote setting up of the cold storages and is not a reimbursement or agreement to meet the cost of the asset acquired I.T.A. Nos.288 to 294/Asr/2015 48 by the appellant company. This fact would be evident from clause (iv) of the Scheme which provides that assessee would

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

losses. It will be further seen that subsidy so provided is only to promote setting up of the cold storages and is not a reimbursement or agreement to meet the cost of the asset acquired I.T.A. Nos.288 to 294/Asr/2015 48 by the appellant company. This fact would be evident from clause (iv) of the Scheme which provides that assessee would

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

losses. It will be further seen that subsidy so provided is only to promote setting up of the cold storages and is not a reimbursement or agreement to meet the cost of the asset acquired I.T.A. Nos.288 to 294/Asr/2015 48 by the appellant company. This fact would be evident from clause (iv) of the Scheme which provides that assessee would

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

losses. It will be further seen that subsidy so provided is only to promote setting up of the cold storages and is not a reimbursement or agreement to meet the cost of the asset acquired I.T.A. Nos.288 to 294/Asr/2015 48 by the appellant company. This fact would be evident from clause (iv) of the Scheme which provides that assessee would

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

losses. It will be further seen that subsidy so provided is only to promote setting up of the cold storages and is not a reimbursement or agreement to meet the cost of the asset acquired I.T.A. Nos.288 to 294/Asr/2015 48 by the appellant company. This fact would be evident from clause (iv) of the Scheme which provides that assessee would

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

losses. It will be further seen that subsidy so provided is only to promote setting up of the cold storages and is not a reimbursement or agreement to meet the cost of the asset acquired I.T.A. Nos.288 to 294/Asr/2015 48 by the appellant company. This fact would be evident from clause (iv) of the Scheme which provides that assessee would

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

losses. It will be further seen that subsidy so provided is only to promote setting up of the cold storages and is not a reimbursement or agreement to meet the cost of the asset acquired I.T.A. Nos.288 to 294/Asr/2015 48 by the appellant company. This fact would be evident from clause (iv) of the Scheme which provides that assessee would

WALIA CONSTRUCATION COMPANY ,PATHANKOT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 139/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263

setting aside the order of the AO with direction to make denovo assessment. I.T.A. No. 139/Asr/2023 3 Assessment Year: 2017-18 4 That the order passed by Pr.CIT-1, Amritsar u/s 263 is bad in law and on facts 5 That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the ground of appeal before the appeal is heard and disposed

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

loss suffered in the previous year which is subject matter of regular assessment. The only finding of the Tribunal in its order dated 25th October 2002 is that the extent of claim for depreciation made by the assessee/ petitioner would not be a subject matter of enquiry in the block assessments. This is for the reason that the claim

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

Loss Account wat incorrect which is evident from the fact that the Id. CIT(A) in his order passed on merits has found these bills to be relating to pure relating to purchase of fixed assets and has accordingly, made the disallowance of only depreciation relating to the same, which has not been challenged by the Revenue before

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-3, FEROZEPUR vs. MEASAGE OM SONS MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDKOT

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

ITA 407/ASR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 37(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

Loss Rs. 2,50,84,399/- Addition on account of difference in valuation rate of the share issued by invoking the provisions of sec 56(2)(viib) of the Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) Rs. 3,38,60,465/- Addition on account of interest on TDS Rs. 2,38,149/- Disallowance of depreciation claimed on trucks in excess