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.

838 results for “depreciation”+ Section 10(37)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,586Delhi2,452Bangalore995Chennai838Kolkata479Ahmedabad380Jaipur193Hyderabad189Raipur148Chandigarh126Pune107Indore90Karnataka81Surat77Amritsar69Visakhapatnam63Cochin52Ranchi40Lucknow35Cuttack35SC32Rajkot30Guwahati24Telangana23Jodhpur23Nagpur22Kerala20Patna16Panaji13Dehradun13Allahabad8Calcutta6Punjab & Haryana3Varanasi3Rajasthan2MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Gauhati1Tripura1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Disallowance79Section 143(3)69Addition to Income66Section 4059Deduction47Depreciation45Section 14A39Section 19530Section 528Section 148

M/S. TANFAC INDUSTREIS LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 3 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA 719/CHNY/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jan 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.Vijayaraghavan, (Advocate)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D.Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

depreciation of 25% would be allowable to the assessee. 4.4 In the technical write-up, the assessee submitted that in normal course, the reactor would run for at least 10 to 15 years. The original 4 reactor was installed in 1985 and was replaced in 2003. The old reactor has served a life of more than 18 years but installed

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 838 · Page 1 of 42

...
22
TDS22
Section 314
ITA 434/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed
ITAT Chennai
11 Feb 2026
AY 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 after reducing the incentive proportionately from the block of assets is grossly erroneous and the Ld.PCIT has failed to consider the nature of the subsidy and the relevant jurisprudence supporting the assessee’s claim in this connection. 36. The ld.AR also drew our attention to the decision of the this Tribunal to the treatment of the same incentive

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

10% additional depreciation amounting to Rs. amounting to Rs.15,71,32,419/- needs to be allowed needs to be allowed in the relevant AY 2012-13. 5.4 The sole ground of the Ld. CIT(A) for denying the above claim was The sole ground of the Ld. CIT(A) for denying the above claim was The sole ground

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

37(1) of the Act as business expenditure and alternatively in terms of section 36(1)(iii) of the Act as well. However, the assessee has not filed any evidence on record to show that the bank loan was utilized for the purpose of business for claiming as business expenses and thus, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground raised

ASTORIA LEATHERS,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2551/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

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

37(1) of the Act as business expenditure and alternatively in terms of section 36(1)(iii) of the Act as well. However, the assessee has not filed any evidence on record to show that the bank loan was utilized for the purpose of business for claiming as business expenses and thus, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground raised

ASTORIA LEATHERS,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2548/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

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

37(1) of the Act as business expenditure and alternatively in terms of section 36(1)(iii) of the Act as well. However, the assessee has not filed any evidence on record to show that the bank loan was utilized for the purpose of business for claiming as business expenses and thus, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground raised

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

37(1) of the Act as business expenditure and alternatively in terms of section 36(1)(iii) of the Act as well. However, the assessee has not filed any evidence on record to show that the bank loan was utilized for the purpose of business for claiming as business expenses and thus, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground raised

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

37,45,880/- after claiming deduction u/s.80IA of the Act to the tune of Rs.2,88,10,028/-. The claim for deduction u/s.80IA of the Act was denied by the CPC vide intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act dated 06.08.2017. The assessee is noted to have filed Form 10CCB on 13.04.2019 before an application was filed u/s.154 before

S. SEETHALAKSHMI,,TIRUPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3),, TIRUPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3071/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3071/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17 S. Seethalakshmi, The Income Tax Officer, 5B, New Ramakrishnapuram, Vs. Ward 1(3), Kongunagar, Tirupur 641 607. Tirupur. [Pan:Bunps9400A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3072/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17 Srinivasan Nandhakumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 18A, Ganapathi Illam, 1St Street, Tsr Ward 1(3), Layout, Tirupur 641 607 Tirupur. [Pan: Acwpn2507P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit 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: Both The Appeals Filed By Different Assessees Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 3, Coimbatore, Both Dated 09.10.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016- 17. The Only Effective Ground Raised In Both The Appeals Of The Assessee Is 2

For Appellant: Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 10Section 32

section 10(2A) of the Act gives an opportunity to the assessees to increase, the personal capital, without any declaration of income without suffering taxation. The personal balance sheet of the assessee would reflect a balance of ₹.4,45,42,733/- instead of ₹.4,37,16,202/-. 5. Before us, while reiterating the submissions as made before the authorities below

SRINIVASAN NANDHAKUMAR,,TIRUPUR vs. ITO, WARD-I(3),, TIRUPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 3072/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3071/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17 S. Seethalakshmi, The Income Tax Officer, 5B, New Ramakrishnapuram, Vs. Ward 1(3), Kongunagar, Tirupur 641 607. Tirupur. [Pan:Bunps9400A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3072/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17 Srinivasan Nandhakumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 18A, Ganapathi Illam, 1St Street, Tsr Ward 1(3), Layout, Tirupur 641 607 Tirupur. [Pan: Acwpn2507P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit 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: Both The Appeals Filed By Different Assessees Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 3, Coimbatore, Both Dated 09.10.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016- 17. The Only Effective Ground Raised In Both The Appeals Of The Assessee Is 2

For Appellant: Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 10Section 32

section 10(2A) of the Act gives an opportunity to the assessees to increase, the personal capital, without any declaration of income without suffering taxation. The personal balance sheet of the assessee would reflect a balance of ₹.4,45,42,733/- instead of ₹.4,37,16,202/-. 5. Before us, while reiterating the submissions as made before the authorities below

COMPUTER AGE MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU 2 , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the assessment years are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1140/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1140, 1141 & 1142/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Computer Age Management Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Services Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, Rayala Towers, 3Rd Floor, Ltu-2, 158, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai 600 002. [Pan Aaacc 3035G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, R. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 14A

depreciation be allowed at 60% on software license as against 25% under the Act’’. 3. Except for the quantum of additional disallowance made u/s.14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’’), appearing in ground No.1, all these grounds are typically worded in all the appeals. These common grounds are considered first. First such ground relates

COMPUTER AGE MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU 2 , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the assessment years are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1142/CHNY/2018[214-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2018

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1140, 1141 & 1142/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Computer Age Management Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Services Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, Rayala Towers, 3Rd Floor, Ltu-2, 158, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai 600 002. [Pan Aaacc 3035G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, R. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 14A

depreciation be allowed at 60% on software license as against 25% under the Act’’. 3. Except for the quantum of additional disallowance made u/s.14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’’), appearing in ground No.1, all these grounds are typically worded in all the appeals. These common grounds are considered first. First such ground relates

RM.K.V.SILKS PRIVATE LIMITED ,TIRUNELVELI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1593/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

section 10(2)(xv) of the Act. We are wholly unable to appreciate the suggestion that if an assessee under some misapprehension or mistake fails to make an entry in the books of account and although, under the law, a deduction must be allowed by the Income-tax Officer, the assessee will lose the right of claiming or will

M/S RM KV FBRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,TIRUNELVELI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 614/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

section 10(2)(xv) of the Act. We are wholly unable to appreciate the suggestion that if an assessee under some misapprehension or mistake fails to make an entry in the books of account and although, under the law, a deduction must be allowed by the Income-tax Officer, the assessee will lose the right of claiming or will

RM.K.V.FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED ,TIRUNELVELI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1594/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

section 10(2)(xv) of the Act. We are wholly unable to appreciate the suggestion that if an assessee under some misapprehension or mistake fails to make an entry in the books of account and although, under the law, a deduction must be allowed by the Income-tax Officer, the assessee will lose the right of claiming or will

DCIT CIRCLE 1 , TIRUNELVELI vs. RMKV SILKS PVT. LTD. , TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1622/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

section 10(2)(xv) of the Act. We are wholly unable to appreciate the suggestion that if an assessee under some misapprehension or mistake fails to make an entry in the books of account and although, under the law, a deduction must be allowed by the Income-tax Officer, the assessee will lose the right of claiming or will

DCIT CIRCLE 1 , TIRUNELVELI vs. RMKV FABRICS PVT. LTD. , TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1624/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

section 10(2)(xv) of the Act. We are wholly unable to appreciate the suggestion that if an assessee under some misapprehension or mistake fails to make an entry in the books of account and although, under the law, a deduction must be allowed by the Income-tax Officer, the assessee will lose the right of claiming or will

DCIT CIRCLE 1 , TIRUNELVELI vs. RM KV FASHION GARMENTS PVT LTD, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 761/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

section 10(2)(xv) of the Act. We are wholly unable to appreciate the suggestion that if an assessee under some misapprehension or mistake fails to make an entry in the books of account and although, under the law, a deduction must be allowed by the Income-tax Officer, the assessee will lose the right of claiming or will

DCIT CIRCLE 1 , TIRUNELVELI vs. RMKV FASHION GARMENTS PVT. LTD. , TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1626/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

section 10(2)(xv) of the Act. We are wholly unable to appreciate the suggestion that if an assessee under some misapprehension or mistake fails to make an entry in the books of account and although, under the law, a deduction must be allowed by the Income-tax Officer, the assessee will lose the right of claiming or will

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TIRUNELVELI vs. M/S RM K V SILKS PRIVATE LIMITED, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 759/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyq आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1621/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Circle-1, Vs. 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 003. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1593/Chny/2017 & Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.1622/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, Tirunelveli. [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.613/Chny/2018 Cross Appeal By Revenue In Ita No.759/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Rmkv Silks Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income 176F, Trivandrum Road, Tax, Tirunelveli – 627 003. Circle-1, [Pan: Aafcr 4024B] Tirunelveli.

Section 47

section 10(2)(xv) of the Act. We are wholly unable to appreciate the suggestion that if an assessee under some misapprehension or mistake fails to make an entry in the books of account and although, under the law, a deduction must be allowed by the Income-tax Officer, the assessee will lose the right of claiming or will