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.

35 results for “depreciation”+ Section 260Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi392Karnataka127Mumbai85Bangalore47Kolkata43Chennai38Calcutta35Amritsar33Telangana31Kerala18SC16Jaipur13Punjab & Haryana9Ahmedabad6Hyderabad5Indore4Orissa4Lucknow4Cuttack2Gauhati2Nagpur2D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Raipur1Rajasthan1Cochin1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Tripura1Visakhapatnam1

Key Topics

Section 260A36Section 26336Depreciation29Addition to Income23Section 3215Section 14A12Deduction12Section 143(3)11Section 80I11Section 32(1)(iia)

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LARGE TAXPAYERS UNITS),KOLKATA vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN COPPER LTD

ITAT/8/2018HC Calcutta01 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260ASection 32Section 32(2)

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directed against the order dated 12th July, 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C-Bench, Kolkata (the ‘Tribunal’) in ITA No.2126/Kol/2014 for the assessment year 2008-09. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: 2 “a) Whether on the facts

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA - 4, KOLKATA vs. M/S JCT LIIMITED

ITAT/162/2017HC Calcutta25 Nov 2021

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date: November 25, 2021. Appearance : Mr. P.K. Bhowmick, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. Asim Choudhury, Adv. … For The Respondent The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, In Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1St June, 2016 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Kolkata In Ita No.1983/Kol/2013 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. The Revenue Has Framed The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Our Consideration: “(A) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Tribunal Was Erred In Law In

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2

11
Disallowance10
Section 115J5
Section 2Section 260ASection 263Section 32

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, in brevity) is directed against the order dated 1st June, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.1983/Kol/2013 for the Assessment Year 2008-09. The revenue has framed the following substantial questions of law for our consideration: “(a) Whether on the facts

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 , KOLKATA vs. M/S. DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION

The appeal stands dismissed

ITAT/172/2017HC Calcutta17 Nov 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260ASection 263Section 32(1)(iia)

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directed against the order dated 15th September, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B-Bench, Kolkata (the ‘Tribunal’) in ITA No.1458/Kol/2015 for the assessment year 2011-12. The revenue has framed the following substantial questions of law for consideration : 2 “a) Whether on the facts

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA 4 vs. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED

In the result, the appeal (ITAT/233/2018) is dismissed and the

ITAT/233/2018HC Calcutta30 Nov 2021

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 30Th November, 2021 Appearance :-

Section 2Section 260ASection 43BSection 50

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 18th October, 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.159/Kol/2016 for assessment year 2006-07. The revenue has framed the following questions of law for consideration :- 2 “(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. ANANDA BAZAR PATRIKA PVT LTD

Accordingly the appeal ITAT/173/2021 fails and is dismissed

ITAT/173/2021HC Calcutta24 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 32(1)(iia)

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated August 9, 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench (Tribunal) in ITA No.1121/Kol/2007 for the assessment year 2003-04. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration:- A. Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed substantial error

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA 4.KOLKATA vs. M/S. V2 RETAIL LIMITED

The appeal stands disposed of on

ITAT/29/2017HC Calcutta04 Jan 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 32

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act in brevity) is directed against the order dated 01.06.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA No. 2413/Kol/2013 for the assessment year 2009-2010. Though the revenue has framed four substantial questions of law for consideration the revenue has pressed only the following

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL-2,KOLKATA vs. M/S. DHANSAR ENGINEERING CO.PVT LTD.

In the result, we find that question no

ITAT/343/2017HC Calcutta14 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 14ASection 153CSection 260ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 32A(2)(b)

260A of the Income Tax Act (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directed against the order dated 9th November, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B-Bench, Kolkata (the ‘Tribunal’) in ITA No.920-923/Kol/2013 for the assessment Year 2007-08 to 2010-2011 and also ITA 467-468/Kol/2013 for the assessment year 2009-10 and 2010-11. The revenue

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) KOLKATA vs. INTEGRATED EDUCATION & RESEARCH CENTRE FOR ENGINEERING & MAN

The appeal stands dismissed

ITAT/276/2017HC Calcutta28 Jul 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : 28Th July, 2022 Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….For Appellant Mr. Dwip Raj Basu, Adv. …For Respondent The Court :- This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1St June, 2016, Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench, Kolkata In Ita No. 620/Kol/2016 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration. I) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Tribunal Erred In Law In Not Considering That Allowing Depreciation In Respect Of A Depreciable Asset For Which The Assessee

Section 11(6)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263Section 32Section 35(2)(iv)

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 1st June, 2016, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 620/Kol/2016 for the assessment year 2012-13. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration. i) Whether on the facts

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-1), KOLKATA vs. RAMKRISHNA FORGING LTD

ITAT/49/2020HC Calcutta27 Jul 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : 27Th July, 2022 Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv., ….For Appellant Mr. S.M. Surana, Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Das, Adv. …For Respondent The Court : This Appeal Filed By Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13Th February 2019 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata In I.T.(Ss).A. No. 09 (Kol) Of 2017 Relating To The A.Y. 2010-2011.. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration :- (I) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Provision For Allowing Additional Depreciation Of Remaining 50% Is Allowable In The Subsequent Year I.E. Assessment Year 2010-11, Although The Statute Allowed The Same W.E.F. 01.04.2016 ? (Ii) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Erred On Facts By Not Appreciating The Legal Provisions That Disallowance Of The Claim Of The Remaining Additional

Section 260ASection 32(1)(iia)

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated 13th February 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench, Kolkata in I.T.(SS).A. No. 09 (kol) of 2017 relating to the A.Y. 2010-2011.. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration :- (i) Whether

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE AND INVESTMENT CO. LTD.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of law

ITAT/174/2021HC Calcutta12 Sept 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : 12Th September, 2022 Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….For Appellant Mr. Abhijit Chatterjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gopal Ram Sharma, Adv. …For Respondent The Court : This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd July, 2020, Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, `D Virtual Court’, Kolkata (Tribunal) In Ita No. 1486/Kol/2019, For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration :- A. Whether The Learned Tribunal Has Committed Substantial Error In Law In Confirming The Decision Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) In Allowing Long Term Capital Loss Of Rs. 1,09,80,30,873/- On Transfer Of Government Securities After Applying Cost Inflation Index On Sale Of Government Securities & Holding He Government Securities Are Not Bond & Debentures For The Purpose Of 3Rd Proviso To Section 48 Of The Act (4Th Proviso After Amendment) Which Is Petently Wrong & Latently Irregular ?

Section 14ASection 260ASection 37(1)Section 40Section 48Section 50

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 22nd July, 2020, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, `D Virtual Court’, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA No. 1486/Kol/2019, for the assessment year 2014-15. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration :- A. Whether the Learned

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

ITAT/211/2022HC Calcutta23 Dec 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263Section 35

depreciation debited in books in relation to scientific research assets. Thereafter, another show cause notice was issued on 23.12.2018 requiring the assessee to explain as to why the excess deduction claimed under Section 35 (2AB) of the Act should not be allowed. For this query the assessee submitted their reply dated 26.12.2018. It was contended that it is clear that

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S BOULEVARD SERVICE PVT LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue fails on the ground

ITAT/70/2021HC Calcutta14 Feb 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : February 14, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. S.N. Dutta, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. … For The Respondent The Court : We Have Heard Mr. S.N. Dutta, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant/Revenue & Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Duly Assisted By Ms. Swapna Das, Learned Counsel For The Respondent/Assessee. There Is A Delay Of 816 Days In Filing The Appeal. The Respondent Has Filed Affidavit-In-Opposition Vehemently Opposing The Delay. On

Section 260A

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act for brevity) is directed against the order dated 24th August, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench ‘C’, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA No. 1741/Kol/2016, 1577/Kol/2017 and 2070/Kol/2016 for the assessment year 2008- 09. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : 1. Whether

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 KOLKATA vs. M/S LANDIS GYR

In the result, the substantial questions of law (i)

ITAT/10/2021HC Calcutta03 Apr 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Acting Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 3Rd April, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ...For The Appellant Mr. Asim Choudhury, Adv. Mr. Soham Sen, Adv. ...For The Respondent. The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’ For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated October 17, 2018 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) In Ita No.524/Kol/2017 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration:

Section 260ASection 32Section 92C

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ for brevity) is directed against the order dated October 17, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA No.524/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2012-13. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: 2 (i) Whether the Learned Income

C. E. S. C. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF I.TAX, KOLKATA-II

ITA/107/2004HC Calcutta14 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 139(5)Section 260A

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directed against the consolidated order dated 29th October, 2003 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” Bench, Kolkata (in short the ‘Tribunal’) in ITA No.1872(Kol) of 2002 for the assessment year 1994-95. The appeal was admitted to decide the following substantial question

M/S. SELVEL ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 12, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the appeal (ITAT/75/2010) stands dismissed

ITAT/75/2010HC Calcutta06 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260ASection 32(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 80I

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ for brevity) is directed against the order dated 11th December, 2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, in ITAT No.820/Kol/2008 and cross-objection No.48/Kol/2008 by the assessee for the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee has raised for the following substantial questions of law for consideration: i) Whether

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRA vs. JOY PARTNERSHIP MINING CENTRE

ITAT/71/2018HC Calcutta15 Nov 2021

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 1961’) has been preferred by the revenue praying to setting aside the order dated 7.9.2016 in ITA No.476/Kol/2013 (Assessment Year 2005-06) (Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax vs. West Bengal Fisheries Corporation Ltd.) and the cross- objection No.44/Kol/2013 (Assessment Year 2005-06) (West Bengal Fisheries Corporation

M/S C AND E LIMITED vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOLKATA 4 KOLKATA

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

ITAT/135/2023HC Calcutta02 Aug 2023

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263Section 801CSection 80I

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is directed against the order dated December 15, 2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA No. 636/Kol/2018 for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The assessee has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: i) Whether the Learned Tribunal failed to consider that

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EPCOS INDIA PVT. LTD.

ITAT/390/2017HC Calcutta10 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 2Section 260ASection 32

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directed against the order dated 22nd June, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Kolkata (the ‘Tribunal’) in ITA No.1161/Kol/2013 for the assessment year 2006-07. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : 2 “(a) Whether on the facts

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-1, KOLKATA vs. WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION CO. LTD.

The appeal stands dismissed

ITAT/155/2017HC Calcutta13 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260ASection 263

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directed against the order dated 21st October, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 1005/Kol/2013 for the assessment year 2008-09. The Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : i) Whether on the facts

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. RELIANCE CHEMOTEX INDUSTRIES LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands

ITAT/308/2018HC Calcutta17 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 14ASection 260A

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ in brevity) is directed against the order dated 16th August, 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata (the ‘Tribunal’ in short) in ITA No.2041/Kol/2014 for the assessment year 2010-11. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether on the facts