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.

114 results for “depreciation”+ Section 194Jclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai146 Bangalore114 Chennai92 Delhi77 Kolkata31 Ahmedabad23 Hyderabad16 Jaipur10 Visakhapatnam10 Pune9 Cuttack8 Amritsar8 Indore5 Raipur4 Chandigarh3 Cochin3 Dehradun2 Patna1 Jabalpur1 Agra1 Surat1 Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 40136 Section 14A100 Section 143(3)82 Disallowance81 Addition to Income66 Deduction52 Section 201(1)47 Depreciation40 Transfer Pricing39

M/S UKN PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2012/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, D.R

Section 10Section 14ASection 40

depreciation. On the ground that purchase of software is essentially purchase of copyright which attracts tax deduction at source under section 194J

M/S VIDAL HEALTH INSURANCE TPA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) , BANGALORE

In the result appeals for A

Showing 1–20 of 114 · Page 1 of 6

Section 36(1)(viia)32

ITA 1213/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri. O.P. Meena

For Respondent: Shri. Ajay Rotti, C.A

Section 194JSection 201(1)Section 40Section 9(1)(iv)

194J of the Act. We therefore are in agreement with the view taken by Ld.CIT (A). Admittedly, assessee has not deducted TDS on payments made towards toll-free charges, and therefore, disallowance under section 40 (a) (ia) is warranted. However, we set aside this issue to Ld.AO for verification as to whether the payee paid taxes on such payments received

JAYARAM REDDY BOOPESH REDDY,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU

In the result the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 711/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bharat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

depreciation and expenses on cars on merit as well as on technical grounds. 31.1 At the outset, we note that the issues raised by the assessee in its grounds of appeal for the AY 2016-17 are identical to the issue raised by the assessee in ITA No. 705/Bang/2025 for the assessment year 2013- 14. Therefore, the findings given

M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX, CIRCLE - 6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised grounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for the years under consideration

ITA 1166/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee RajkumarFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 32Section 40

depreciation under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) by observing as under: “5.5 Under the circumstances, I am constrained to invoke the amended provisions of section 9(1) with regard to definition of ‘royalty’ and to apply the same for the purpose of section 194J

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA-BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised grounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for the years under consideration

ITA 958/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee RajkumarFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 32Section 40

depreciation under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) by observing as under: “5.5 Under the circumstances, I am constrained to invoke the amended provisions of section 9(1) with regard to definition of ‘royalty’ and to apply the same for the purpose of section 194J

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA-BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised grounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for the years under consideration

ITA 978/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee RajkumarFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 32Section 40

depreciation under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) by observing as under: “5.5 Under the circumstances, I am constrained to invoke the amended provisions of section 9(1) with regard to definition of ‘royalty’ and to apply the same for the purpose of section 194J

M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised grounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for the years under consideration

ITA 1092/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee RajkumarFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 32Section 40

depreciation under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) by observing as under: “5.5 Under the circumstances, I am constrained to invoke the amended provisions of section 9(1) with regard to definition of ‘royalty’ and to apply the same for the purpose of section 194J

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R &D INSTITUTE INDIA- BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as per revised grounds stands allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed for the years under consideration

ITA 1046/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee RajkumarFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 32Section 40

depreciation under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) by observing as under: “5.5 Under the circumstances, I am constrained to invoke the amended provisions of section 9(1) with regard to definition of ‘royalty’ and to apply the same for the purpose of section 194J

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S W.S. ATKINS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and C

ITA 1083/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Respondent: Shri M.K. Biju, JCIT (DR) (ITAT)-3, Bengaluru

depreciation. On the ground that purchase of software is essentially purchase of copyright which attracts tax deduction at source under section 194J

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2136/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &

Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

section 35E(3)(iii) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2139/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &

Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

section 35E(3)(iii) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2138/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &

Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

section 35E(3)(iii) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2137/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &

Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

section 35E(3)(iii) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2135/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &

Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

section 35E(3)(iii) wherein it is specified that, this allowance is not claimable in respect of items of a capital nature, on which depreciation is allowable u/s 32 of the Act. It is seen that the items included by the AO (as extracted in the AO’s order) are in the nature of depreciable items. The assessee

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S RAMBUS CHIP TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 61/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P.Boaz

For Appellant: Shri G.C.Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT(DR)

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 92C

194J, Section 194K,Section 194L, Section 195, Section 196A, Section 196B, Section 196C and Section 196D shall pay within the prescribed time, the sum so deducted to the credit of the Central Government or as the Board directs. 201(1). If any such person and in the cases referred to in Section 194, the principal officer and the company

M/S RAMBUS CHIP TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 23/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P.Boaz

For Appellant: Shri G.C.Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT(DR)

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 234BSection 92C

194J, Section 194K,Section 194L, Section 195, Section 196A, Section 196B, Section 196C and Section 196D shall pay within the prescribed time, the sum so deducted to the credit of the Central Government or as the Board directs. 201(1). If any such person and in the cases referred to in Section 194, the principal officer and the company

HUBLI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY ,HUBBALLI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), HUBALLI

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

ITA 341/BANG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Smt. Prathibha R., A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R

Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 250Section 40

depreciation under section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961( 43 of 1961). (5) (a) The CENVAT credit shall be allowed even if any inputs or capital goods as such or after being partially processed are sent to a job worker for further processing, testing, repair, re- conditioning, or for the manufacture of intermediate goods necessary for the manufacture

M/S SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 484/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmedappeal No. Appellant Respondent Assessment Year

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee RajkumarFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 32Section 40

depreciation under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) by observing as under: “5.5 Under the circumstances, I am constrained to invoke the amended provisions of section 9(1) with regard to definition of ‘royalty' and to apply the same for the purpose of section 194J

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE - 6, BANGALORE vs. M/S. SAMSUNG R & D INSTITUTE INDIA -BANGALORE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

ITA 1045/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmedappeal No. Appellant Respondent Assessment Year

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee RajkumarFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 32Section 40

depreciation under section 40(a)(i)/(ia) by observing as under: “5.5 Under the circumstances, I am constrained to invoke the amended provisions of section 9(1) with regard to definition of ‘royalty' and to apply the same for the purpose of section 194J

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S NOVELL SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed and the

ITA 281/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavanshri S Jayaramanit(Tp)A No.281 /Bang/2015 (Asst. Year 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore. . Appellant Vs. M/S Novell Software Development India Pvt. Ltd., ‘Laurel, ‘Block-D, 65/2, Bagmane Tech Park, C.V Raman Nagar, Byrasandra, Bangalore-560 093. . Respondent

For Appellant: Shri T Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R Reddy, CIT

Section 14ASection 40

depreciation of Rs.3,69,858/- was claimed under Section 32. 27. The Assessing Officer, however, held that the payment for purchase of software was in the nature of ‘royalty’ in terms of Explanation 2 to Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act and held that the assessee ought to have deducted tax at source under Section 194J