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.

1,111 results for “depreciation”+ Section 10(20)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,400Delhi3,105Bangalore1,326Chennai1,111Kolkata714Ahmedabad510Hyderabad316Jaipur279Pune184Chandigarh181Raipur165Surat127Karnataka124Indore111Amritsar92Cochin82Visakhapatnam81Cuttack73Lucknow58Rajkot56SC53Jodhpur40Ranchi39Telangana37Nagpur36Guwahati30Kerala20Dehradun19Panaji16Agra15Patna14Allahabad13Varanasi8Calcutta8Rajasthan5Punjab & Haryana3Gauhati2Jabalpur2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Tripura1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)70Disallowance70Addition to Income66Section 4061Depreciation43Deduction43Section 14A38Section 19530Section 528Section 148

FRESH & HONEST CAFE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1500/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1499 & 1500/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2009-10 & 2010-11 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1485/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Fresh & Honest Café Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate, V. Income Tax, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Company Circle Ii(1), 1St Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020. Chennai - 600 020. Pan : Aaacf 1516 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 32(1)(iia)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

Showing 1–20 of 1,111 · Page 1 of 56

...
25
TDS23
Section 14717

FRESH & HONEST CAFE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1485/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1499 & 1500/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2009-10 & 2010-11 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1485/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Fresh & Honest Café Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate, V. Income Tax, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Company Circle Ii(1), 1St Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020. Chennai - 600 020. Pan : Aaacf 1516 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 32(1)(iia)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

FRESH & HONEST CAFE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1499/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1499 & 1500/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2009-10 & 2010-11 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1485/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Fresh & Honest Café Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate, V. Income Tax, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Company Circle Ii(1), 1St Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020. Chennai - 600 020. Pan : Aaacf 1516 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 32(1)(iia)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

MEENAKSHI (INDIA) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 206/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Apr 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.206/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Meenakshi (India) Limited, The Assistant Commissioner Of C/O Shri T.N. Seetharaman, V. Income Tax, Advocate, Corporate Circle – 4(1), #384 (Old No.196), Lloyds Road, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 086. Pan : Aaacm 5386 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.B. Koli, JCIT
Section 32(1)(iia)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. ADDISON & COMPANY LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 862/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 862/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri. Sahadevan, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. R.Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

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

20% X 50%]. Further, according to the assessee, it was legally entitled to the 50%]. Further, according to the assessee, it was legally entitled to the 50%]. Further, according to the assessee, it was legally entitled to the balance 10% of the eligible additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia) of the balance 10% of the eligible additional depreciation

M/S. HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. PCIT-4, , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 434/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 254Section 263Section 43(1)

depreciation adjustment. When the Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) of the Act is inapplicable, there is no incidence to taxation, which has been held by the AO by stating that the IPS is a capital receipt, not chargeable to tax. 17. In view of the above arguments, the ld.AR submitted that all the relevant documents and submissions have already

TAGROS CHEMICALS INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 703/CHNY/2015[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.703/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 M/S Tagros Chemicals India Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of Jhaver Centre, Raja Annamalai V. Income Tax, Building, Corporate Circle – 3(1), 72 (Old No.19), Marshals Road, Chennai - 600 034. Egmore, Chennai - 600 008. Pan : Aaact 2952 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anish Unni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. H. Kabila, JCIT
Section 32(1)(iia)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to 5 I.T.A. No.703/Mds/15 be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

AUTOMOTIVE COACHES & COMPONENTS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1789/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1789/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Automotive Coaches & The Deputy Commissioner Of Components Ltd., V. Income Tax, C1 & D6 Sipcot Industrial Company Circle – I, Complex, Chennai - 600 034. Gummidipoondi – 601 201. Pan : Aaaca 3150 E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT
Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to 7 I.T.A. No.1789/Mds/14 be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

JCIT (OSD), CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI vs. INDIA PISTON LTD., CHENNAI

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

ITA 1615/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1615/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Joint Commissioner Of Income M/S. India Piston Ltd., Tax (Osd), Corporate Circle 2(2), Vs. Huzur Gardens, Room No. 512, 5Th Floor, Wanaparthy Madhavaram High Road, Block, No. 121, M.G. Road, Sembiam, Chennai 600 011. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaaci1439E] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.03.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

20% additional depreciation on new asset acquired, the balance 10% of additional depreciation was claimed in the next year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. In similar facts and circumstances, in the case of CIT v. Rittal India Private Limited (supra), the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has observed and held as under: “7. Clause (iia) of Section

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

section 32AC(4)(v) of the Act in as much as per said provisions, it is very clear that if assessee claims depreciation then it cannot claim investment allowances on new asset. The A.O and Ld. CIT(A) after considering the facts that the assessee already claimed 80% depreciation on new asset and further 20% additional depreciation giving total

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

section 32AC(4)(v) of the Act in as much as per said provisions, it is very clear that if assessee claims depreciation then it cannot claim investment allowances on new asset. The A.O and Ld. CIT(A) after considering the facts that the assessee already claimed 80% depreciation on new asset and further 20% additional depreciation giving total

THE MUSIC ACADEMY MADRAS,CHENNAI vs. DDIT, CHENNAI

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

ITA 1098/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1098/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Music Academy Madras, The Deputy Director Of Income Tax No.168 (Old No.306), Ttk Road, V. (Exemptions), Royapettah, Chennai - 600 014. Chennai - 600 034 . Pan : Aaatt 0256 B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 32

depreciation in respect of asset which was used as tool for carrying out charitable object of the institution. When the asset was used as tool for carrying out the object of the charitable institution, such activity cannot be construed as a business or profession of the assessee. Therefore, Section 32 of the Act is not applicable in this case

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 1590/CHNY/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 32(1)(ii)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 1593/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 32(1)(ii)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 1591/CHNY/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 32(1)(ii)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

HINDUJA FOUNDRIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 1592/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1590, 1591, 1592 & 1593/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 32(1)(ii)

20% of the actual cost of such machinery. The dispute is the year in which the depreciation has to be allowed. The assessee has already claimed 10% of the depreciation in the earlier assessment year since the machinery was used for less than 180 days and claiming the balance 10% in the year under consideration. Section

ARUNA ALLOY STEELS PRIVATES LIMITED,MADURAI vs. ACIT,CORP. CIRCLE-1, MADURAI, MADURAIQ

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2803/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Mr.Ashwin D. Gowda
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 156Section 80I

20 of 2002, Section 33, for " Where the assessee is a person other than a company or a cooperative society, the deduction" (w.e.f. 1.4.2003).] under sub-section (1) from profits and gains derived from an [undertaking] [ Substituted by Act 14 of 2001, Section 44, for certain words (w.e.f. 1.4.2002).] shall not be admissible unless the accounts of the [undertaking] [Substituted

ASTORIA LEATHERS,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in I

ITA 2553/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Madhavan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271B

20,772/- for the assessment year 2009-10. Since depreciation claim in respect of Toyota Innova car was disallowed, correspondingly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the vehicle maintenance expenses for both the assessment years and the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowances. Since we have directed the Assessing Officer to allow eligible depreciation on Toyota Innova Car, hereinabove at para

ASTORIA LEATHERS,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in I

ITA 2549/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Madhavan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271B

20,772/- for the assessment year 2009-10. Since depreciation claim in respect of Toyota Innova car was disallowed, correspondingly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the vehicle maintenance expenses for both the assessment years and the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowances. Since we have directed the Assessing Officer to allow eligible depreciation on Toyota Innova Car, hereinabove at para