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.

42 results for “depreciation”+ Section 2(24)(x)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai908Delhi719Bangalore302Ahmedabad232Jaipur156Kolkata134Chennai127Raipur111Chandigarh101Hyderabad70Pune68Cochin42Karnataka36Surat33Indore33Guwahati29Rajkot25Visakhapatnam24Lucknow24Amritsar20SC12Jodhpur9Nagpur8Cuttack7Allahabad7Ranchi7Telangana7Agra6Dehradun4Patna4Rajasthan3Calcutta2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Addition to Income36Section 14821Section 143(3)16Deduction10Disallowance10Section 10A9Depreciation8Section 407Section 1476Section 194

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

x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee on or before the due date. In other words, there is a marked distinction between the nature and character of the 10 Ayurgreen Ayurveda Hospitals Pvt. Ltd. two amounts – the employer’s liability

Showing 1–20 of 42 · Page 1 of 3

6
Reopening of Assessment6
Section 43B5

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

2(24)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee on or before the due date. In other words, there is a marked distinction between the nature and character of the two amounts – the employer’s liability is to be paid

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

2(24)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee on or before the due date. In other words, there is a marked distinction between the nature and character of the two amounts – the employer’s liability is to be paid

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

2(24)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by Explanation to Section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e., depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee on or before the due date. In other words, there is a marked distinction between the nature and character of the two amounts – the employer’s liability is to be paid

THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SRI.JOSE THOMAS, ADOOR

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 55/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 213/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 31/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

THE ACIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SMT.GRACY BABU, ADOOR P.O.

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 239/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 35/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 34/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 304/COCH/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 33/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 29/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 306/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 305/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 309/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 310/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 28/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 308/COCH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SRI.JOSE THOMAS, ADOOR

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 238/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

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

x 10,40,400)] and not Rs 1,57,62,060/- assessed in the hands of Gracy Babu. The Ld. AR submitted that while holding that Rs 10,40,470/- out of Rs.25,40,470/- received as sale consideration of rubber estate per acre formed part of consideration in lieu of relinquishment of trusteeship, the assessing officer