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.

48 results for “depreciation”+ Section 153Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai557Delhi455Bangalore236Hyderabad118Chennai103Jaipur81Pune64Cochin48Amritsar45Kolkata45Ahmedabad43Indore37Nagpur34Chandigarh30Visakhapatnam26Karnataka22Raipur18Guwahati16Cuttack10Rajkot9Lucknow7Kerala5Dehradun5Allahabad4Telangana3Surat3Jodhpur2Calcutta1Jabalpur1Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1SC1

Key Topics

Section 153A66Addition to Income41Section 13234Section 153C30Section 143(3)20Section 143(2)14Depreciation10Disallowance10Section 139(4)7Section 143(1)

SRI.PELEXY K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

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

ITA 276/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

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

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

section 153C cannot be initiated by the Assessing Officer, which finding is consistent with the precedents referred to by the Tribunal itself, does not spell out any illegality.” 3.9.7 In view of the above, when the original assessments for the assessment year 2006-07 to 2010-11 had already been completed or the time limit to complete the assessments

SRI.PELEXY K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE DCIT, ERNAKULAM

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

Showing 1–20 of 48 · Page 1 of 3

7
Section 132(4)7
Undisclosed Income7
ITA 270/COCH/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

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

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

section 153C cannot be initiated by the Assessing Officer, which finding is consistent with the precedents referred to by the Tribunal itself, does not spell out any illegality.” 3.9.7 In view of the above, when the original assessments for the assessment year 2006-07 to 2010-11 had already been completed or the time limit to complete the assessments

SRI.PELEXY K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

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

ITA 274/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

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

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

section 153C cannot be initiated by the Assessing Officer, which finding is consistent with the precedents referred to by the Tribunal itself, does not spell out any illegality.” 3.9.7 In view of the above, when the original assessments for the assessment year 2006-07 to 2010-11 had already been completed or the time limit to complete the assessments

SRI.PELEXY K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

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

ITA 275/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

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

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

section 153C cannot be initiated by the Assessing Officer, which finding is consistent with the precedents referred to by the Tribunal itself, does not spell out any illegality.” 3.9.7 In view of the above, when the original assessments for the assessment year 2006-07 to 2010-11 had already been completed or the time limit to complete the assessments

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 601/COCH/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

153A filed the return of income returning the same income as in the original return of income filed. The Assessing Officer made addition towards depreciation claimed on asset which was not there in the original return of income on the ground that in the absence of any proof of the asset brought in and that the assessee could not prove

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 603/COCH/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

153A filed the return of income returning the same income as in the original return of income filed. The Assessing Officer made addition towards depreciation claimed on asset which was not there in the original return of income on the ground that in the absence of any proof of the asset brought in and that the assessee could not prove

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 607/COCH/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

153A filed the return of income returning the same income as in the original return of income filed. The Assessing Officer made addition towards depreciation claimed on asset which was not there in the original return of income on the ground that in the absence of any proof of the asset brought in and that the assessee could not prove

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 604/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

153A filed the return of income returning the same income as in the original return of income filed. The Assessing Officer made addition towards depreciation claimed on asset which was not there in the original return of income on the ground that in the absence of any proof of the asset brought in and that the assessee could not prove

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 602/COCH/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

153A filed the return of income returning the same income as in the original return of income filed. The Assessing Officer made addition towards depreciation claimed on asset which was not there in the original return of income on the ground that in the absence of any proof of the asset brought in and that the assessee could not prove

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 606/COCH/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

153A filed the return of income returning the same income as in the original return of income filed. The Assessing Officer made addition towards depreciation claimed on asset which was not there in the original return of income on the ground that in the absence of any proof of the asset brought in and that the assessee could not prove

SREEKUMARI AMMA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 605/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

153A filed the return of income returning the same income as in the original return of income filed. The Assessing Officer made addition towards depreciation claimed on asset which was not there in the original return of income on the ground that in the absence of any proof of the asset brought in and that the assessee could not prove

V D DEVASIA,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 50/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Sept 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 64

153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian A. AY 2011-12 1. The return of income for this year was in the first instance filed on 31.5.2013 admitting an income of Rs.2,13,840. The same, a valid return

V D DEVASIA,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 49/COCH/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Sept 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 64

153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian A. AY 2011-12 1. The return of income for this year was in the first instance filed on 31.5.2013 admitting an income of Rs.2,13,840. The same, a valid return

CHENGAZHASSERIL THOMAS KURIAN,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTTAYAM, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 474/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Sept 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 64

153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian A. AY 2011-12 1. The return of income for this year was in the first instance filed on 31.5.2013 admitting an income of Rs.2,13,840. The same, a valid return

V D DEVASIA,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 48/COCH/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Sept 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 64

153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian A. AY 2011-12 1. The return of income for this year was in the first instance filed on 31.5.2013 admitting an income of Rs.2,13,840. The same, a valid return

V D DEVASIA,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 47/COCH/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Sept 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 64

153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian A. AY 2011-12 1. The return of income for this year was in the first instance filed on 31.5.2013 admitting an income of Rs.2,13,840. The same, a valid return

CHENGAZHASSERIL THOMAS KURIAN,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTTAYAM, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 472/COCH/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Sept 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 64

153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian A. AY 2011-12 1. The return of income for this year was in the first instance filed on 31.5.2013 admitting an income of Rs.2,13,840. The same, a valid return

CHENGAZHASSERIL THOMAS KURIAN,KOTTAYAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTTAYAM, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals by the assessees are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 473/COCH/2022[ 2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 64

153A of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO). 3. We shall proceed assessee-wise and year wise. I. Shri C.T. Kurian A. AY 2011-12 1. The return of income for this year was in the first instance filed on 31.5.2013 admitting an income of Rs.2,13,840. The same, a valid return

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

section 142 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is issued to Shri Mohammed Kutty Haji @ Tharif Mall, Shri Hamza Puthukudy, Tharif Builders Pvt. Ltd. (name of person) to produce or cause to be produced books of account or other documents which will be useful for, relevant to, proceedings under the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, or under the Income

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

section 142 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is issued to Shri Mohammed Kutty Haji @ Tharif Mall, Shri Hamza Puthukudy, Tharif Builders Pvt. Ltd. (name of person) to produce or cause to be produced books of account or other documents which will be useful for, relevant to, proceedings under the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, or under the Income