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.

12 results for “depreciation”+ Section 43Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai85Delhi35Chennai29Bangalore12Kolkata10Ahmedabad6SC6Pune6Karnataka2Rajkot2Telangana2Chandigarh2Visakhapatnam1Amritsar1Cochin1Hyderabad1Kerala1Nagpur1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 14A30Section 10A25Section 4014Addition to Income11Section 234B8Deduction7Section 80J6Section 80H6Section 80I6Disallowance

M/S. TATA ELXSI LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), , BENGALURU

ITA 974/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jan 2024AY 2017-18
Section 10ASection 30Section 80ASection 80HSection 80I

depreciation\nand investment allowance. Therefore, the term profits and gains are not\nsynonymous with the term 'income'.....\nReading of Section 80HH along with Section 80A would clearly signify that such a\ndeduction has to be of gross profits and gains, i.e., before computing the income as\nspecified in Sections 30 to 43D

M/S. TATA ELXSI LIMITED., ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

6
Section 305
Exemption5
ITA 927/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: Disposed
ITAT Bangalore
08 Jan 2024
AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Kincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 10ASection 30Section 80ASection 80H

depreciation and investment allowance. Therefore, the term profits and gains are not synonymous with the term 'income'..... Reading of Section 80HH along with Section 80A would clearly signify that such a deduction has to be of gross profits and gains, i.e., before computing the income as specified in Sections 30 to 43D

M/S. TATA ELXSI LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 975/BANG/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jan 2024AY 2020-2021
Section 10ASection 30Section 80ASection 80HSection 80I

depreciation\nand investment allowance. Therefore, the term profits and gains are not\nsynonymous with the term 'income'.\nReading of Section 80HH with Section 80A would clearly signify that such a\ndeduction has to be of gross profits and gains, i.e., before computing the income as\nspecified in Sections 30 to 43D

TATA ELXSI LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER INCOMER TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1152/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Tata Elxsi Ltd., The Deputy 126, Itpb Road, Commissioner Hoody, Of Income Tax, Whitefield, Circle – 7(1)(1), Bangalore – 560 048. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaact7872Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT DR
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 250

depreciation and investment allowance. Therefore, the term profits and gains are not synonymous with the term 'income'..... Reading of Section 80HH along with Section 80A would clearly signify that such a deduction has to be of gross profits and gains, i.e., before computing the income as specified in Sections 30 to 43D

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), MANGALURU, MANGALURU vs. KARNATAKA BANK LTD., MANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for AYs 2016-17 and\n2017-18 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 963/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Feb 2024AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

depreciation of\nRs.13,16,10,956.\nThe AO did not accept the same. The CIT(A)\nobserved that the appellant failed to furnish any copy of audit report in\nForm 29B to comply the provision of section 115JB(4) of the Act.\nConsidering the argument of the ld. AR of the assessee, we remit this\nissue to the AO fresh

M/S INFOSYS LTD ,BANGALOR E vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as by revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 735/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.735/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Sreenivas T. Bidari, D.R
Section 11Section 14ASection 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 80J

43D. Sections 30 to 36 confer specific deductions. Section 37 deals with expenditure which is general in nature and not covered within sections 30 to 36. The allowability of brand building expense would have to be examined under section 37 - the residuary section. To examine eligibility of brand building expenses under section 37, the character of expenditure needs

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S INFOSYS LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee as well as by revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 809/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.735/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Sreenivas T. Bidari, D.R
Section 11Section 14ASection 194JSection 234BSection 40Section 80J

43D. Sections 30 to 36 confer specific deductions. Section 37 deals with expenditure which is general in nature and not covered within sections 30 to 36. The allowability of brand building expense would have to be examined under section 37 - the residuary section. To examine eligibility of brand building expenses under section 37, the character of expenditure needs

SMT. LIZY GEORGE,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 7(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 398/BANG/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri V Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT (DR)
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

depreciation, whereas the AO has considered it as 9.35%. At the last of argument on this issue, considering to the entire facts he was agreed after taking oral consent from the proprietor of the business that he was agreed for 5% on the turnover declared in the Page 20 of 34 audit report for the impugned assessment year on 07/09/2022

KARNATAKA BANK LTD,MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MANGALORE

Appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 876/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Feb 2024AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

43D of Income Tax Act, interest in relation to such categories of bad or doubtful debts as may be prescribed having regard to the guidelines issued by the RBI in relation such debts, shall be chargeable to tax in the previous year in which it is credited to the Profit and Loss Account.\"\n\n13.1 After analyzing the submissions

SEVA BHARATHI TRUST,CHAMARAJANAGARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHAMARAJANAGARA

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

ITA 1486/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Seva Bharathi Trust, Vs. Ito, Sevabharathi College Campus, Ward –1, Chennipuradamole Road, Chamarajanagara. Chamarajanagara – 571 313. Pan : Aabts 6034 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Vageesh Hegde, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Vageesh Hegde, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 11Section 119Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139

43D of the Income-tax Act, unless such Losses/Expenses are expressly or by necessary implication disallowed by the Act. Therefore, even applying the theory of Real Income, a debit which is expressly disallowed by Explanation to section 36(1)(vii), if claimed, has got to be added back to the total income of the assessee because the said Act seeks

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), MANGALURU, MANGALURU vs. KARNATAKA BANK LTD., MANGALURU

Appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 964/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Feb 2024AY 2017-18
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

43D of Income Tax Act, interest in relation to such\ncategories of bad or doubtful debts as may be prescribed having\nregard to the guidelines issued by the RBI in relation such debts,\nshall be chargeable to tax in the previous year in which it is\ncredited to the Profit and Loss Account.\n13.1 After analyzing the submissions

KARNATAKA BANK LTD,MANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for AYs 2016-17 and\n2017-18 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 877/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Feb 2024AY 2017-18
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

43D of Income Tax Act, interest in relation to such\ncategories of bad or doubtful debts as may be prescribed having\nregard to the guidelines issued by the RBI in relation such debts,\nshall be chargeable to tax in the previous year in which it is\ncredited to the Profit and Loss Account.\n13.1\nAfter analyzing the submissions