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.

1,313 results for “depreciation”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,475Delhi3,074Bangalore1,382Chennai1,313Kolkata611Ahmedabad518Hyderabad303Jaipur269Pune256Chandigarh145Raipur144Cochin124Indore94Visakhapatnam82SC80Lucknow74Karnataka62Surat61Amritsar59Rajkot54Ranchi45Nagpur45Jodhpur36Kerala32Guwahati29Cuttack27Patna25Calcutta20Panaji15Dehradun12Punjab & Haryana12Allahabad9Agra9Telangana8Varanasi6Rajasthan6Jabalpur5Orissa3Gauhati2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Tripura1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)71Disallowance63Section 14A55Addition to Income44Deduction43Depreciation40Section 153A37Section 115J33Section 26333Section 10A

BANNARI AMMAN SUGARS LIMITED ,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT , COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 939/CHNY/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.939/Chny/2022 िनधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2015-16 Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of 1212, Trichy Road, Income Tax, Coimbatore – 641 018. Vs. Corporate Circle-1, [Pan: Aaacb-8933-G] Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.946/Chny/2022 िनधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Asst. Commissioner Of Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd., Income Tax, 1212, Trichy Road, Central Circle-3(2), Vs. Coimbatore – 641 018. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacb-8933-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N. Senthil Kumar, Cit : 15.05.2023 सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manomohan Das, J.M: Aforesaid Two Appeals Nos. Ita/939/Chny/2022 & Ita 946/Chny/ 2022 Filed By Assessee & Department Respectively Arises Out Of The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 16, Chennai [Hereinafter “Cit(A)”] Dated 17-08-2022 For The

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Senthil Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 32ASection 4

deduction (whether by way of depreciation or otherwise) in computing the income ITA Nos.939 & 946/Chny/2022 :- 3 -: chargeable under the head

Showing 1–20 of 1,313 · Page 1 of 66

...
30
Section 14817
Section 1116

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI vs. M/S. BANNARI AMMAN SUGARS LTD, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 946/CHNY/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.939/Chny/2022 िनधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2015-16 Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of 1212, Trichy Road, Income Tax, Coimbatore – 641 018. Vs. Corporate Circle-1, [Pan: Aaacb-8933-G] Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.946/Chny/2022 िनधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Asst. Commissioner Of Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd., Income Tax, 1212, Trichy Road, Central Circle-3(2), Vs. Coimbatore – 641 018. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacb-8933-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N. Senthil Kumar, Cit : 15.05.2023 सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manomohan Das, J.M: Aforesaid Two Appeals Nos. Ita/939/Chny/2022 & Ita 946/Chny/ 2022 Filed By Assessee & Department Respectively Arises Out Of The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 16, Chennai [Hereinafter “Cit(A)”] Dated 17-08-2022 For The

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Senthil Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 32ASection 4

deduction (whether by way of depreciation or otherwise) in computing the income ITA Nos.939 & 946/Chny/2022 :- 3 -: chargeable under the head

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1059/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1078/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 967/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1063/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1076/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1883/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1060/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 947/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1077/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,MADURAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1846/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

ACIT, MADURAI vs. J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LTD., MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1272/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1062/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

J.K.FENNER (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, MADURAI

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1061/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

MADURAI POWER CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. PCIT, CORP CIRCLE 4(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1396/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. N.V.Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263Section 801ASection 80I

deduction u/s.80IA by reducing its claim of depreciation so that in the years when this claim of deduction u/s.80IA is no longer

ITO CORPORATE WARD 3(2), CHENNAI vs. TTG INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1934/CHNY/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate
Section 154Section 32

deduction of depreciation under section 32 shall be mandatory. 30.3 Under the existing provisions, no deduction for depreciation is allowed

M/S. ASHOK LEYLAND LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NCC-8(1), LTU-II, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2379/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Nathala Ravi Babu, CIT
Section 14A

deduction of balance additional depreciation u/s assessee’s claim for deduction of balance additional depreciation u/s assessee’s claim for deduction

TITAN COMPANY LIMITED 9EARSTWHILE KNOWN AS TITAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED),KRISHNAGIRI vs. ACIT LTU 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 518/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri T. Surya Narayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143(3)

depreciation on trade marks as acquired in earlier years. The trademarks were stated to be related towatch division as well as jewellery division. The units availing deduction

TITAN COMPANY LIMITED 9EARSTWHILE KNOWN AS TITAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED),KRISHNAGIRI vs. ACIT LTU 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 505/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri T. Surya Narayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143(3)

depreciation on trade marks as acquired in earlier years. The trademarks were stated to be related towatch division as well as jewellery division. The units availing deduction