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.

34 results for “depreciation”+ Section 12A(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai261Delhi205Bangalore167Chennai90Ahmedabad89Jaipur53Kolkata40Pune40Lucknow34Chandigarh34Visakhapatnam32Hyderabad24Karnataka22Cuttack18Cochin17Amritsar16Indore14Ranchi7Agra5Nagpur4Rajkot4Patna3Jodhpur2Panaji2Raipur2Dehradun2Surat2Telangana2SC1

Key Topics

Section 1167Section 12A30Exemption30Section 13(3)28Addition to Income22Section 1021Section 143(2)14Depreciation12Section 143(1)9Section 143(3)

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,SIRMOUR vs. ADDL. CIT, SOLAN

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

ITA 388/CHANDI/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Aditya Sood, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 80I

12A) of the Income Tax Act 1961. 15. That on 7th & 8th December 2009, survey u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act 1961 was carried out in the business-cum-office premises of M/s. Asha Technologies, Vill: Johron, Trilokpur Road, Kala Amb (H.P.). During the course of survey operation, a day book pertaining to Asst. Year 2007-08 was found

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

7
Charitable Trust7
Deduction7

M/S ASHA TECHNOLOGIES,KALA AMB vs. ITO, SIRMOUR

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

ITA 61/CHANDI/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Aditya Sood, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 80I

12A) of the Income Tax Act 1961. 15. That on 7th & 8th December 2009, survey u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act 1961 was carried out in the business-cum-office premises of M/s. Asha Technologies, Vill: Johron, Trilokpur Road, Kala Amb (H.P.). During the course of survey operation, a day book pertaining to Asst. Year 2007-08 was found

ARYA COLLEGE,LUDHIANA, PUNJAB vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE 1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 1132/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: \nShri B.M. Monga & Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocatesFor Respondent: \nShri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

Depreciation as per books of accounts of | Rs.12,40,731/-\nthe assessee (Mandatory)\n| TOTAL INCOME | -66,923/-\n4. The CPC, Bangalore has processed the return but made\naddition of Rs.11,39,77,899/- by denying the benefit of\nSection 11 and 12 of the Act. It is pertinent to observe that if\nbenefit of Section

DCIT, C-,1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB MEDICAL FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUST, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 10/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Cir.1(Exemption) M/S.Punjab Medical Foundation Chandigarh. Vs. Charitable Trust 63-64, Waryam Nagar Cool Road, Jalandhar Pan : Aaatp 5171 B (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Sudhir Sehal, Advocate Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Ashok K. Khana, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18/11/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/12/2020 आदेश/O R D E R

For Respondent: Shri Ashok K. Khana, Addl.CIT
Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

12A(a) The running of chemist sho1p is considered as integral part for the last 26 years that is from 1991 till date. Please also see 251 CTR Page 237 2 The A.O. stated that profit rate of Pharmacy is being run on 20.02 is commercial where as he commercial basis himself accepted 22.43% during 6 previous year

KANDI FRIENDS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,ROPAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 797/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

12A(a) of the Income Tax Act, which was granted on 25.01.2001 vide CIT/CHD,TECH 3812A7869. The assessee Trust has filed its return of income on 30.09.2014 and 28.09.2015 declaring ‘nil’ income for assessment year 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. The case of the assessee for both the years was selected for scrutiny assessment and notices u/s 143(2

KANDI FRIENDS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,ROPAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSION OF INCOME TAX, CL. 1, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 798/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

12A(a) of the Income Tax Act, which was granted on 25.01.2001 vide CIT/CHD,TECH 3812A7869. The assessee Trust has filed its return of income on 30.09.2014 and 28.09.2015 declaring ‘nil’ income for assessment year 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. The case of the assessee for both the years was selected for scrutiny assessment and notices u/s 143(2

THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,PATIALA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, PATIALA

ITA 687/CHANDI/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

For Appellant: Shri Vibhor Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250(6)

section 11 is computed as under :- Particulars Income 1. Gross receipts 113416023 2. Expenditure- Total expenditure 43285738 70130285 75474465/- Rs. 3,21,88,727/- (Depreciation claimed on building under construction) 3. 85% of Rs. 11,34,16,023/- Rs. 9,64,03,619/- 4. Amount utilized by the Society Rs. 4,32,85,738/- 5. Difference

JCIT(OSD), C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, PATIALA

ITA 874/CHANDI/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

For Appellant: Shri Vibhor Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250(6)

section 11 is computed as under :- Particulars Income 1. Gross receipts 113416023 2. Expenditure- Total expenditure 43285738 70130285 75474465/- Rs. 3,21,88,727/- (Depreciation claimed on building under construction) 3. 85% of Rs. 11,34,16,023/- Rs. 9,64,03,619/- 4. Amount utilized by the Society Rs. 4,32,85,738/- 5. Difference

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 30/CHANDI/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SCHOOL( MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 27/CHANDI/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 137/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 28/CHANDI/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 2/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 136/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 29/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT, C-1 (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS SOCIETY, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 52/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)

12A of the Income Tax Act. The\nincome of a charitable Institution has to be determined as\nper Section 11 of the Income Tax Act. A perusal of this\nSection would reveal that this Section has been amended\nfrom time to time, but the basicstructure of this Section\nremains as it is. It provides that income derived from\nproperty held

M/S SHIVA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,BILASPUR vs. ACIT, MANDI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for

ITA 490/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri B.M. Monga Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. H.S. Dhillon, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 147

depreciation which is ITA No. 490/Chd/2017- M/s Shiva Educational Society, Bilaspur (H.P.) 2 mandatory and allowable as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act and as interpreted by Hon'ble Courts. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in not allowing the benefit of provisions of Section 11 and 12 after registration of appellant under Section 12AA

GEETA VIDYA MANDIR SIKSHA SAMITI,NARAINGARH vs. ITO, (E), AMBALA

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

ITA 853/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. CIT
Section 11(1)(d)Section 12A

2,61,838/- is a part of funds received during the year, the observation of the assessing officer in this regard are upheld. Further the assessee has claimed Corpus Donation of Rs. 17,57,837/-. The receipts "Corpus Donation" was not declared in the return of income or in the Balance Sheet. Before the assessing officer only list

ITO, WARD (E), CHANDIGARH vs. SANT BABA SUNDER SINGH, BARNALA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed said order was pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself

ITA 1183/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Diva Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Manjit Singh, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajit Saldi
Section 10Section 11Section 143(3)Section 68

2'BC. Consequently the assessee claim for exemption u/s. 10(23C)(iiiad) is valid, notwithstanding the fact that the assessee is not notified u/s. 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. Accordingly the second of the reasons adduced by the learned CIT(A) for denial of exemption is clearly erroneous and the claim of the assessee requires to be allowed