Search: depreciation | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

253 results for “depreciation”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,449 Delhi3,741 Chennai1,736 Bangalore1,563 Kolkata1,003 Ahmedabad996 Pune584 Hyderabad474 Jaipur440 Chandigarh301 Karnataka259 Cochin253 Visakhapatnam202 Raipur184 Surat173 Indore170 Cuttack153 Amritsar116 Rajkot88 SC80 Lucknow80 Guwahati65 Nagpur64 Telangana62 Ranchi60 Jodhpur49 Patna34 Kerala32 Agra31 Calcutta29 Panaji24 Dehradun23 Allahabad21 Punjab & Haryana12 Jabalpur10 Varanasi9 Rajasthan6 Orissa3 Gauhati2 D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 Tripura1

Key Topics

Addition to Income69 Section 143(3)66 Deduction44 Section 32(1)(iia)39 Disallowance38 Depreciation34 Section 80I29 Section 26329 Section 14720 Section 14A

THE VELIMALAI RUBBER CO. LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. THE ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 381/COCH/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

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

For Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR

deduction under rule 8(2) is allowed in lieu of depreciation. As a result of the judicial pronouncements, double deduction

THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. THE DCIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 239/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

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

Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR

Showing 1–20 of 253 · Page 1 of 13

...

19

Section 32(1)(ii)16

For Respondent:

deduction under rule 8(2) is allowed in lieu of depreciation. As a result of the judicial pronouncements, double deduction

THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. THE ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2/COCH/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sri.Iype JohnFor Respondent: Sri.Mritunjaya Sharma, Sr.DR

deduction under rule 8(2) is allowed in lieu of depreciation. As a result of the judicial pronouncements, double deduction

THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. THE ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1/COCH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sri.Iype JohnFor Respondent: Sri.Mritunjaya Sharma, Sr.DR

deduction under rule 8(2) is allowed in lieu of depreciation. As a result of the judicial pronouncements, double deduction

M/S.MARYMATHA SCHOOL TRUST,COCHIN vs. THE ITO(EXEMPTION), COCHIN

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

ITA 285/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.285/Coch/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Mary Matha School Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer Thrikkakara P.O. (Exemption), Kochi. Kochi-682 021. [Pan:Aabtm 0241L]

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 272A(2)(e)Section 272A(3)Section 272A(4)

depreciation and deduction of depreciation from gross income of the Institution. Accordingly, it was held that normal depreciation could be considered

M/S.FORTUNE ELASTOMERS P. LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. THE ACIT,CIR-2(1), KOZHIKKODE, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 154/COCH/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Oct 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.154/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2004-05 M/S. Fortune Elastomers P. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Kolathara P.O., Income-Tax,Circle-2(1), Kozhikode. Kozhikode-673 635. [Pan:Aaacf 5028Q].

Section 72Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

deduction even before adjusting unabsorbed depreciation of the earlier years. Regarding 80IB deduction, the CIT(A) relied on the judgment

THE DIT ( EXEMPTION), KOCHI vs. M/S.INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION COCHIN BRANCH, COCHIN

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 507/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

deduction. It was submitted that depreciation is a statutory deduction allowable under the I.T. Act and restriction on allowing depreciation

THE ADIT ( EXEMPTION), KOCHI vs. M/S.INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION COCHIN BRANCH, COCHIN

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 327/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

deduction. It was submitted that depreciation is a statutory deduction allowable under the I.T. Act and restriction on allowing depreciation

BABY MARINE EXPORTS,KOLLAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 198/COCH/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Sunny Chandy Eapen, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR

depreciation on assets were allowable deductions. 4. The CIT Appeals has erred in sustaining the disallowance of overhead expenses and should

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

deduction on account of depreciation on tangible or intangible assets shall not exceed, in any previous year, the deduction calculated

POLAKULATH NARAYANAN RENAI MEDICITY,KOCHI vs. THE DCIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 253/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Polakulath Narayanan Renai Dcit, Non Corporate Circle 1(1) Medicity C.R. Building, I.S. Press Road Main Road, Palarivattom Vs. Kochi 682018 Kochi 682025 Pan – Aaifp7597B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mathew Joseph, Ca Revenue By: Ms. Swarnalatha, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.08.2024 O R D E R Per: Soundararajan K.,J.M. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Challenges The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 23.04.2023 In Respect Of Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Running A Hospital & During The Assessment Year The Assessing Authority Had Capitalised The Interest Component Of The Interior Works For The Reason That The Work Was Done Over A Period Of Time & Hence The Interest Till The Completion Of The Work Is To Be Capitalised. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Also Capitalised The Interest Component On The Capital Asset I.E.On The Sewage Plant Since The Same Was Put Into Use At The Fag End Of The Assessment Year. The Ao Also Treated The Interest On Fixed Deposits As Margin Money Under The Head ‘Income From Other

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Swarnalatha, Sr.DR

depreciation and not considered the deduction claimed on the capital asset depreciation as per the revised return filed by the assessee

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

depreciable asset, so much so under the block system, this sale value would go to reduce the WDV of the particular block of assets. I.T.A. No.110/Coch/2018 3) At any rate the provisions of section 50(2) of the Act (Slump Sale) would not be applicable. 4) The Officers below were also not justified in partially allowing deduction

KERALA TRANSPORT DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE PCIT , TRIVANDRUM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 443/COCH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Assessment Year:2018-19 Kerala Transport Development Finance .......... Appellant Corporation Limited, Thiruvananthapuram. Pan: Aabck1318F Vs.

For Appellant: Smt. Anoopa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Veni Raj, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 32

depreciation cannot be allowed as a deduction. 8. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record

M/S.ABAD FISHERIES,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, CORPCIR-1(1), KOCHI, KOCHI

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

ITA 118/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 May 2019AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sri.P.K.SasidharanFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32(1)(iia)

deduction of additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia) of the I.T.Act. Therefore, we are of the view that the deduction

M/S.SOUTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK ( PRESENTLY- KERALA GRAMIN BANK),MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE_2(2), TIRUR, TIRUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 363/COCH/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

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

Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

deduction of the incremental amount of provision made towards depreciation on investments? 3. The assessee does not claim depreciation on the investments

M/S.SOUTH MALABAR GRAMINA BANK,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), TIRUR, THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), TIRUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 364/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

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

Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

deduction of the incremental amount of provision made towards depreciation on investments? 3. The assessee does not claim depreciation on the investments

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), TIRUR, TIRUR vs. M/S. SOUTH MALABAR GRAMINA BANK H.O., MALAPPURAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 366/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

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

Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

deduction of the incremental amount of provision made towards depreciation on investments? 3. The assessee does not claim depreciation on the investments

M/S OIL PALM INDIA LTD,KOTTAYAM vs. DCIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 37/COCH/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Oil Palm India Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Xiv/130, Kottayam South P.O., Circle – 1, Kodimatha, Kottayam. Kottayam. Pan : Aaaci 3695 G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR

Section 143(3)Section 154

Depreciation Rs. 11,99,111 (Step 1) Rs. 12,21,19,883 108% of (Rs. 12,21,19,883) (C) Rs.13,18,89,474 Rs. 8,35,60,251 Balance Income * Less: Further (Step 2) Deduction

AYUR GREEN AYURVEDA HOSPITALS PRIVATE LIMITED,MALAPPURAM vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 565/COCH/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Mar 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmiayurgreen Ayurveda Hospsitals Vs Dcit, Private Limited Cpc, Door No. 1/301 Ayurgreen Bengaluru. Ayurveda Hospitals, Kaladi Mlp Edappal, Malappuram-679585. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaica 4294 M

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 2Section 30Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

deductions, such as Sections 32 - 37, on the other hand, deal primarily with business, commercial or professional expenditure, under various heads (including depreciation

THE ACIT,CIR-1(1),, TRIVANDRUM vs. M/S.US TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL P. LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, both appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objection of the

ITA 514/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

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

Section 10ASection 10A(5)Section 253(2)

deduction under section 80HH or 80HHA or Yes 6(iii) section 80-I or setion 80-IA or section 80-IB is allowable on profits of the undertaking Sub-section In computing the depreciation