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.

33 results for “depreciation”+ Block Assessmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,540Delhi1,189Chennai544Bangalore513Kolkata389Ahmedabad375Hyderabad192Pune144Jaipur115Chandigarh110Raipur109Karnataka77Amritsar54Cuttack53Indore38Visakhapatnam35Guwahati34Cochin33Surat31Nagpur29SC22Lucknow20Rajkot14Telangana12Allahabad10Ranchi9Agra7Jabalpur6Dehradun6Jodhpur5Panaji4Kerala2Calcutta2Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Orissa1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)25Addition to Income22Depreciation19Section 153A18Disallowance17Section 13215Section 14A14Section 14811Section 2639Section 50B

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), THRISSUR, THRISSUR vs. M/S.KERALA COMMUNICATORS CABLE LTD, THRISSUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed and

ITA 271/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. P.K.JayanFor Respondent: Sri.Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha
Section 143(3)

Assessing Officer allowed 15% depreciation by observing as follows: “28. Even if the claim of assessee for depreciation on STB is treated to be admissible, it cannot at any rate be admissible at 100% or 80% as claimed in Form 3CD treating it as “”building”. The assessee also claims that Form 3CD is generated online and in the depreciation blocks

ACEELERATED FREEZE DRYING CO.LTD,ALAPPUZHA vs. DCIT, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the appeal of the

Showing 1–20 of 33 · Page 1 of 2

9
Section 153D6
Deduction5
ITA 1286/COCH/2005[2002-03]Status: Disposed
ITAT Cochin
28 Jun 2019
AY 2002-03

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(14)Section 42Section 50BSection 50B(1)

block of assets on which depreciation was being allowed. Assessee's counsel contended that when depreciable assets are sold, provision to be applied for assessment

DCIT, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S ACEELERATED FREEZE DRYING CO, LTD, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the appeal of the

ITA 714/COCH/2008[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Jun 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(14)Section 42Section 50BSection 50B(1)

block of assets on which depreciation was being allowed. Assessee's counsel contended that when depreciable assets are sold, provision to be applied for assessment

K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 235/COCH/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

depreciation 6,26,61,743 6. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended before the CIT(A) that the assessment order passed by the AO is invalid as the JCIT had granted a mechanical approval u/sec. 153D of the Act and the additions cannot be made in absence

K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 236/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

depreciation 6,26,61,743 6. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended before the CIT(A) that the assessment order passed by the AO is invalid as the JCIT had granted a mechanical approval u/sec. 153D of the Act and the additions cannot be made in absence

K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 237/COCH/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

depreciation 6,26,61,743 6. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended before the CIT(A) that the assessment order passed by the AO is invalid as the JCIT had granted a mechanical approval u/sec. 153D of the Act and the additions cannot be made in absence

M/S.MUTHOOTT MINI FINANCIERS P. LTD,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2,, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 279/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 14ASection 32

depreciation for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. This ground of appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 277 & 278/Coch/2019 is allowed. 3.7 However, for the assessment year 2012-13, the assessee itself has offered income from letting out property as income from house property. As such, the assessee cannot have any grievance and is entitled to only

M/S.MUTHOOTT MINI FINANCIERS P. LTD,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2,, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 278/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 14ASection 32

depreciation for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. This ground of appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 277 & 278/Coch/2019 is allowed. 3.7 However, for the assessment year 2012-13, the assessee itself has offered income from letting out property as income from house property. As such, the assessee cannot have any grievance and is entitled to only

M/S.MUTHOOTT MINI FINANCIERS P. LTD,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2,, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 277/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 14ASection 32

depreciation for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. This ground of appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 277 & 278/Coch/2019 is allowed. 3.7 However, for the assessment year 2012-13, the assessee itself has offered income from letting out property as income from house property. As such, the assessee cannot have any grievance and is entitled to only

THARIF BUILDERS P. LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. THEACIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 487/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

block period at a uniform rate.” Hence, we cannot say that there was no search action u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act so as to frame assessments u/s. 153A of the I.T. Act. The assessments were also based on material gathered during the course of survey u/s. 133A of the I.T. Act. In view of the above judgments

THARIF BUILDERS P. LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. THEACIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 489/COCH/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

block period at a uniform rate.” Hence, we cannot say that there was no search action u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act so as to frame assessments u/s. 153A of the I.T. Act. The assessments were also based on material gathered during the course of survey u/s. 133A of the I.T. Act. In view of the above judgments

THARIF BUILDERS P. LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. THEACIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 488/COCH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

block period at a uniform rate.” Hence, we cannot say that there was no search action u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act so as to frame assessments u/s. 153A of the I.T. Act. The assessments were also based on material gathered during the course of survey u/s. 133A of the I.T. Act. In view of the above judgments

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), THRRISSUR vs. MANJILAS AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD., THRISSUR

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 34/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri C V Varghese, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

block of assessment. Hence this contention is wrong. 11. The assessee filed the return of income for AY 2012-13 declaring a total income of Rs.22,61,383. The case was selected for scrutiny and a notice u/s.143(2) was duly served on the assessee. The AO made the following disallowances while concluding the assessment u/s.143(3) (i) Disallowance commission

MANJILAS AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD,THRISSUR vs. THACIT,CIRCLE-1(1 ), THRISSUR

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 32/COCH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri C V Varghese, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

block of assessment. Hence this contention is wrong. 11. The assessee filed the return of income for AY 2012-13 declaring a total income of Rs.22,61,383. The case was selected for scrutiny and a notice u/s.143(2) was duly served on the assessee. The AO made the following disallowances while concluding the assessment u/s.143(3) (i) Disallowance commission

MANJILAS AGRO FOOD PVT.LTD.,THRISSUR vs. THE ITO,WARD-1(2),, THRISSUR

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 33/COCH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri C V Varghese, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

block of assessment. Hence this contention is wrong. 11. The assessee filed the return of income for AY 2012-13 declaring a total income of Rs.22,61,383. The case was selected for scrutiny and a notice u/s.143(2) was duly served on the assessee. The AO made the following disallowances while concluding the assessment u/s.143(3) (i) Disallowance commission

ERNAKULAM REGIONAL COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNIONS LTD.,KOCHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

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

ITA 588/COCH/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Radhesh L. Bhat, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

block of assets while computing the depreciation as per the IT Rules. However, the CIT(A) without going into the details, upheld the disallowance made by the AO. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The ld. AR submitted that – Additional depreciation • While completing the scrutiny assessment

THE ITO,COR.WD-1, KOCHI vs. BHAGHEERATHA ENGINEERING LIMITED, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 500/COCH/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 32(1)

block of assets itself amounts to use for purpose of business and therefore, depreciation is allowable on it, even though the said I.T.A. Nos.500&501/Coch/2018 asset was not actually used in course of business during relevant assessment

M/S.AMALGAM FOODS LTD,KOCHI vs. THE DCIT, CIR-1, ALLEPPEY, ALLEPPEY

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

ITA 110/COCH/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Apr 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 2Section 43BSection 50(2)Section 50B

assessment. 2) The Officers below did not appreciate the fact that the assessee had sold depreciable asset, so much so under the block

MUTHOOT HEALTHCARE P. LTD,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE ACIT, , THIRUVALLA

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

ITA 413/COCH/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 170Section 32(1)(ii)Section 47

Assessing Officer after examining the claim of the assessee in detail, recomputed the depreciation allowable without considering the revaluation of assets and allowed depreciation of Rs.4,65,07,189/-. 4. On appeal, the CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Poulose and Mathen P. Ltd. (236 ITR 416) which

DIADORA SHOES PVT LTD,CALICUT vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1), CALICUT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 92/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Anil Kumar Dugar, Jm

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 250Section 32(1)(iia)

Assessing Officer was not justified in disallowing additional depreciation amounting to Rs.59,000/- in respect of new machinery acquired and put to use in the preceding year.” 7. The operative part of the order afore-referred is reproduced as under :- “3. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. 3.1 To begin with, in terms