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.

4 results for “depreciation”+ Section 49(1)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,564Delhi1,312Bangalore591Chennai305Kolkata260Ahmedabad238Jaipur132Hyderabad129Raipur127Chandigarh107Amritsar66Indore61Pune53Karnataka53Surat45Visakhapatnam41Cuttack38Lucknow31SC21Rajkot21Guwahati17Nagpur17Telangana12Cochin12Allahabad9Jodhpur8Agra6Ranchi6Kerala5Varanasi5Patna5Calcutta4Panaji3Dehradun3Jabalpur1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 133(6)7Addition to Income3Section 260A2Depreciation2

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ITC LIMITED

Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated

ITA/125/2018HC Calcutta27 Jun 2024

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI,HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ

49 of 77 "property" within the meaning of Section 2 (14) of the Act 1961. vi) Further referring to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Oberoi Hotel Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (1999) 3 SCC 127 (paras 7 to 11), it is contended that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has examined

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOL-3, KOLKATA vs. SIKARIA INFRAPROJECTS PVT. LTD.

ITA/112/2018HC Calcutta24 Jun 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

Section 1Section 133(6)Section 44A

iii) On account of no reply submitted by six parties to notices under Section 133(6) of the Act, 1961: Rs.2,16,21,174/-. iv) On account of no reply received from eleven parties pursuant to notices under Section 133(6) of the Act, 1961: Rs.4,89,43,299/-. 4 iv) Penalty amount not disallowed by the assessee while computing

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S GANESH REALTY AND MALL DEVELOPMENT PVT LTD

Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same stands dismissed

ITAT/66/2021HC Calcutta11 Feb 2022

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

Section 143(3)Section 260A

1, KOLKATA -Versus- M/S. GANESH REALTY AND MALL DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD. Appearance: Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. ...for the appellant. Mr. Vivek Murarka, Adv. For the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM -And- The Hon’ble JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 11th February, 2022. The Court : We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S RAMKRISHNA FORGINGS LTD

In the result the appeal is partly allowed

ITAT/258/2022HC Calcutta08 Feb 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 8Th February, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. S.M. Surana, Adv. Ms. Sapna Das, Adv. Mr. S. Das, Adv. …For Respondent

Section 260ASection 36Section 37Section 43(5)Section 43B

depreciation was claimed in preceding assessment year on new plant and machinery which was put to use for less than 180 days, ignoring the reasoned order of the A.O. and relying on the assessee’s submission ? ii) WHETHER the Learned Tribunal has erred in law in holding that forex loss is allowance as expenditure under section