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.

3 results for “depreciation”+ Section 8Oclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5Bangalore4Hyderabad3Jaipur3Chennai3Delhi2Kolkata1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 14A22Addition to Income3Deduction2Disallowance2

SENTHIL ENERGY PVT LTD,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, CORP WARD -4, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 581/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.581/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S. Senthil Energy Pvt.Ltd. Vs Income Tax Officer, 6Th Floor, Senthil Towers, Corporate Ward-4, Avinashi Road, Coimbatore. Coimbatore-641 018. Pan: Aascs 7231G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.Suresh Periasamy,JCITFor Respondent: 11.03.2021
Section 115J

8o% because it is pre-installed is not in consonance with the legislative intent and there will he discrimination between same class of assessees’ i.e. assessees who have newly purchased and installed WTGs and assesses who have purchased second hand WTGs(not requiring installation as it is pre installed), In fact the legislative purpose will not be served

SHRIRAM CAPITAL LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 512/CHNY/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2015AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.512 &513 /Mds/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-2011 & 2011- 2012)

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. N. Rengaraj, IRS, CIT
Section 14A

section 14A by an artificial method of interpretation.” However, we find that the calculation of disallowance under Rule 8D(iii) made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by Ld CIT(A) is not correct In view of the fact that Assessing Officer had included the value of total investments for calculation of disallowance whereas in our opinion the value

SHRIRAM CAPITAL LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 513/CHNY/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2015AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.512 &513 /Mds/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-2011 & 2011- 2012)

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. N. Rengaraj, IRS, CIT
Section 14A

section 14A by an artificial method of interpretation.” However, we find that the calculation of disallowance under Rule 8D(iii) made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by Ld CIT(A) is not correct In view of the fact that Assessing Officer had included the value of total investments for calculation of disallowance whereas in our opinion the value