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.

7 results for “depreciation”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai475 Delhi320 Chennai133 Bangalore120 Jaipur116 Kolkata77 Ahmedabad75 Hyderabad53 Chandigarh34 Pune33 Indore28 Raipur27 Cochin24 Surat21 Lucknow18 Nagpur17 Visakhapatnam14 Rajkot12 Guwahati12 Ranchi8 Agra7 Amritsar7 Varanasi7 Jodhpur6 Cuttack6 Allahabad5 Telangana5 Karnataka3 SC3 Dehradun2 Jabalpur2 Patna2

Key Topics

Section 115B8 Section 69A6 Addition to Income6 Section 143(3)5 Section 250(6)4 Section 80I4 Section 693 Section 44A3 Section 2633 Survey u/s 133A

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SAMBA vs. SH. ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA, SAMBA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in Ground nos

ITA 475/ASR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.475/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 40Section 80I

unexplained investment and disallowance of Rs.5,56,880/-out of depreciation allowance even though the assessee could not prove the genuineness

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: Disposed

3

Business Income2

ITAT Amritsar

13 Sept 2023

AY 2006-07

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

Section 147Section 148Section 250

unexplainable source. In appeal, the ITAT held that CIT(A) could not give direction to reopen case for another year. On revenue's appeal, the Hon'ble Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the order of ITAT. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Eskay Knit (India) Ltd vs. DCIE (2014) 110 DTR 126 (Bom), under identical facts, comprehensively held as under

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

unexplained investment under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and tax thereon charged as per section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT Amritsar Bench in the case of Rakesh Kumar v. DCIT in ITA No. 65/Asr/2023 order dated 14.06.2023 where it was held vide para

SH. GURJINDER SINGH,AMRITSAR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 185/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kalia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT DR

Section 194CSection 263

unexplained income. 24.10.2016 Letter received from Haldiram Mfg Co Pvt Ltd Gurgaon as per which Nil balance shown in the assesee’s account opening and closing balance 10.11.2016 Counsel appeared. Furnished the written submissions to show cause notice and furnished copy of Cash A/c. Asked to explain the discrepancies with books of accounts. Explanation with narration cash withdrawn not explained

DASHMESH TIMBER AND FURNITURE HOUSE,AJNALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 542/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 115BSection 133ASection 133A(3)(iii)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

depreciation will be allowed. In the present case, to the extent of the expenditure incurred for construction of the building, out of unexplained source is concerned, it is to be construed as income earned from the business and it will take character of the business income. The case law relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) is distinguishable

SHRI TEJPAL SINGH,AMRITSAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assesseeITA No

ITA 266/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 266/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69A

depreciation will be allowed. In the present case, to the extent of the expenditure I.T.A. No. 266/Asr/2023 6 Assessment Year: 2018-19 incurred for construction of the building, out of unexplained source is concerned, it is to be construed as income earned from the business and it will take character of the business income. The case law relied upon

SHRI NAVAL KISHORE SINGH,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JAMMU

In the result, the ground of appeal No

ITA 376/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Joginder Singh, C. A

Section 144Section 250Section 44A

unexplained increase in capital account, made by the AO vide order u/s 144 of the Act for AY 2014-15 is confirmed. Accordingly, the grounds raised in this appeal are dismissed.” 7. Regarding the second issue of disallowance of the claim of bank interest the observation of the Ld. CIT(A) is as follows: “7.3 In this ground of appeal