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.

109 results for “depreciation”+ Section 97clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,426Delhi1,140Bangalore500Ahmedabad374Chennai367Kolkata237Jaipur175Hyderabad148Chandigarh109Pune101Indore69Raipur69Amritsar56Cochin56Cuttack56Visakhapatnam52Lucknow42Guwahati29Nagpur27Surat26Ranchi22Rajkot18Karnataka15SC15Agra13Jodhpur10Allahabad8Dehradun7Patna6Telangana6Calcutta3Kerala1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Punjab & Haryana1Varanasi1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 80H52Addition to Income45Section 13(3)36Exemption27Section 143(3)25Deduction25Disallowance23Depreciation21Section 10B20Section 143(2)

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 140/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

depreciation rate of 60 % should not be allowed to assessee. 5. Further various submissions made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings are analyzed as under: • However, first of all it is observed that the order of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of CISCO System(India) Pvt. Limited is related to the Audit Video Conferencing devices and depreciation

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

Showing 1–20 of 109 · Page 1 of 6

19
Section 250(6)16
Section 80I16
ITA 139/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

depreciation rate of 60 % should not be allowed to assessee. 5. Further various submissions made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings are analyzed as under: • However, first of all it is observed that the order of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of CISCO System(India) Pvt. Limited is related to the Audit Video Conferencing devices and depreciation

M/S FASTWAY TRANSMISSION (P) LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 547/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

depreciation rate of 60 % should not be allowed to assessee. 5. Further various submissions made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings are analyzed as under: • However, first of all it is observed that the order of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of CISCO System(India) Pvt. Limited is related to the Audit Video Conferencing devices and depreciation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LTD, CHANDIGARH

ITA 556/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12
For Respondent: \nThe DCIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

depreciation and as against the returned income of Rs.\n21,05,09,769/-, the assessed income was determined at Rs.44,75,88,075/- under\nthe normal provision and income under section 115JB at Rs.12,83,97

WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 528/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

depreciation and as against the returned income of Rs. 21,05,09,769/-, the assessed income was determined at Rs. 44,75,88,075/- under the normal provision and income under section 115JB at Rs. 12,83,97

M/S PAGRO FROZEN FOODS PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, W-2(3), CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1076/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253

depreciation current year income year 2012-13 25199906 7429889 17770017 2013-14 7027382 0 7027382 Total 32227288 7429889 24797399 Losses to be carried forward Rs. 2,47,97,399/-. Assessed. Issue requisite documents. Charge Interest u/s 234A/B/C, if any. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act is being initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income

NAHAR INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA

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

ITA 1554/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1554/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 Nahar Industrial Enterprises The Acit, Circle-7, बनाम Limited, Focal Point, Aayakar Bhawan, Ludhiana Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana Tan No: Aaccn3563A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Navdeep Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Dahiya, CIT (DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)

section 115JB of the Act inter alia making addition of Rs. 60,86,81,068/- on account of repurchase of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCB). The assessee challenged the assessment order before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) after hearing the assessee partly allowed the appeal and held that out of Rs. 60.83 crore an amount

DR. APURVA GOSWAMY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

ITA 1344/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: This Bench Is To Contest The Confirmation Of Addition Of A Sum Of Rs.1,17,82,620/- Out Of The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer. This Ground Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri. Harish NayyarFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

97,094/- + 1,12,41,737/- being software assets for the assessee) is disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. 6. The addition was unsuccessfully challenged before the Ld. CIT(A). 7. Before the Ld' CIT(A), copies of bills of expenses charged to the expense head Business Development Expenses were filed. It was explained that

DR. APURVA GOSWAMY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

ITA 1343/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: This Bench Is To Contest The Confirmation Of Addition Of A Sum Of Rs.1,17,82,620/- Out Of The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer. This Ground Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri. Harish NayyarFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

97,094/- + 1,12,41,737/- being software assets for the assessee) is disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. 6. The addition was unsuccessfully challenged before the Ld. CIT(A). 7. Before the Ld' CIT(A), copies of bills of expenses charged to the expense head Business Development Expenses were filed. It was explained that

M/S SABER PAPER BOARD PRIVATE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, LUDHIANA

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

ITA 585/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. G.S.Phani Kishore, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal)- 5, Ludhiana failed to appreciate the facts and statistically confirming the disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 25,97

M/S SABER PAPER LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, LUDHIANA

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

ITA 582/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. G.S.Phani Kishore, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal)- 5, Ludhiana failed to appreciate the facts and statistically confirming the disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 25,97

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)

Depreciation disallowed and excess of income 2,82,41,720 over expenditure Total Taxable Income 10,47,74,451 5. The assessee has taken eight grounds of appeal in assessment year 2014-15 and ten grounds of appeal in assessment year 2015-16. In brief, its grievance revolves around the additions noticed by us in the above table and rest

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)

Depreciation disallowed and excess of income 2,82,41,720 over expenditure Total Taxable Income 10,47,74,451 5. The assessee has taken eight grounds of appeal in assessment year 2014-15 and ten grounds of appeal in assessment year 2015-16. In brief, its grievance revolves around the additions noticed by us in the above table and rest

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)

97,124 respectively after the claim of depreciation . The same A.O. accepted the professional payment to DR. R.S.Chahl at Rs.61,94,5627 During the previous year and his predecessor at RS 50,29,4627 during the assessment year 2011-2012. He is M.Ch. and standing of about four decades to his credit The payment to trustee is allowable

ACIT, C-7, LUDHIANA vs. M/S CEIGALL INDIA LTD., LUDHIANA

In the result appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 291/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT
Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 69C

depreciation claimed by appellant on the profit arrived at by applying net profit rate of 6.5% on the total receipts instead of flat rate of 12% applied by the AO. iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 84,19,383/- made u/s 69C of the Income

ACIT,CIRCLE PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA vs. M/S V.K.SOOD ENGINEERS & CONTRACTOR, PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 79/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 79/Chd/2020 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 बनाम The Acit, M/S V.K. Sood Engineers & Circle, Panchkula Contractor Ddsjv, Unit-Iii, H.No. 20, Sector-6 Panchkula-134109, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aagfv0584J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

section 143(3) of the Act determining the total income at Rs. 1,97,42,335/- as against the returned income of Rs. 49,56,930/- . The AO determined the total income of the Assessee after making addition of Rs. 1,29,89,679/- on account of unverifiable bogus and excessive expenses claimed, Rs. 1,16,995 on account

M/S TJR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CC-2, CHANDIGARH

ITA 3/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 68

97,834/- to be unsustainable and the same is, accordingly, deleted, while accepting Ground No.13. 64.1 According to Ground No.14, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance of depreciation on vehicle to the extent of Rs.9,11,484/- 64.2 It is seen that the disallowance of Rs.9,11,484/-, representing depreciation on vehicle, has been made

ACIT, CC-2, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S TJR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

ITA 144/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 68

97,834/- to be unsustainable and the same is, accordingly, deleted, while accepting Ground No.13. 64.1 According to Ground No.14, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance of depreciation on vehicle to the extent of Rs.9,11,484/- 64.2 It is seen that the disallowance of Rs.9,11,484/-, representing depreciation on vehicle, has been made

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)

97,07,767/- ( 6,33,47,767/- - 1,36,40,000/-) has actually not been applied for the purposes of construction of buildings and to avail the benefit of section 11 of the I.T. Act, 1961..” b) Expenditure not eligible for exemption on account of donation paid by the society: During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed that

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)

97,07,767/- ( 6,33,47,767/- - 1,36,40,000/-) has actually not been applied for the purposes of construction of buildings and to avail the benefit of section 11 of the I.T. Act, 1961..” b) Expenditure not eligible for exemption on account of donation paid by the society: During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed that