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.

122 results for “depreciation”+ Section 2(31)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,758Delhi2,436Bangalore1,021Chennai809Ahmedabad695Kolkata556Hyderabad317Pune313Jaipur309Chandigarh184Raipur156Visakhapatnam124Indore122Cochin122Surat107Cuttack103Karnataka95Amritsar93Rajkot62Lucknow58Ranchi50SC45Guwahati45Nagpur37Jodhpur34Telangana24Dehradun21Kerala19Allahabad18Agra18Panaji14Patna6Calcutta4Jabalpur3Rajasthan2D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Varanasi1Tripura1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Punjab & Haryana1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income72Section 143(3)47Disallowance41Deduction34Depreciation29Section 153C28Section 26325Section 153A23Section 11(2)20Section 132

SILLS KARINGATTIL JOSE,NEDUMKANDOM vs. ITO WARD 2, THODUPUZHA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 132/COCH/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhsils Karingattil Jose Income Tax Officer Np 3/406, Karingattil Ward - 2, House, Munnar Road Thodupuzha Vs. Nedumkandom P.O. [Pan: Afopj8789C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Veeramani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(V)Section 250Section 50CSection 53ASection 56(2)(vii)

depreciated “FMV” of the company shares already held in light of the foregoing case law, the impugned addition be deleted. 9. The Revenue on the other hand has strongly supported the impugned addition made in the assessee’s hands u/s 56(2)(vii)(c)(ii) of the Act. 10. It is in this factual backdrop that we first

Showing 1–20 of 122 · Page 1 of 7

16
Section 1115
Section 80I12

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 60/COCH/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2006-07

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

Section 14A

31) of section 10, is not includible in the total income. 8.5 The Ld. AR submitted that the above Rule covers incomes which are derived from the sale of certain items which are obtained from rubber plants grown. It was submitted that the above rule does not cover incomes which have been derived from the sale of the rubber plants/trees

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.ASPINWALL & CO. LTD, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 133/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

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

Section 14A

31) of section 10, is not includible in the total income. 8.5 The Ld. AR submitted that the above Rule covers incomes which are derived from the sale of certain items which are obtained from rubber plants grown. It was submitted that the above rule does not cover incomes which have been derived from the sale of the rubber plants/trees

ASPINWALL & COMPANY LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 61/COCH/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2006-07

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

Section 14A

31) of section 10, is not includible in the total income. 8.5 The Ld. AR submitted that the above Rule covers incomes which are derived from the sale of certain items which are obtained from rubber plants grown. It was submitted that the above rule does not cover incomes which have been derived from the sale of the rubber plants/trees

M/S ASPINWALL & CO.,LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result,the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 128/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2020AY 2012-13

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

Section 14A

31) of section 10, is not includible in the total income. 8.5 The Ld. AR submitted that the above Rule covers incomes which are derived from the sale of certain items which are obtained from rubber plants grown. It was submitted that the above rule does not cover incomes which have been derived from the sale of the rubber plants/trees

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
Section 10

31) of section 10, is not includible in the total income". (vi) It is pertinent to note that while most assessees having income from tea claimed deduction for cost of replantation of tea bushes under Rule 8(2) of the Income Tax Rules, some assessees started claiming depreciation

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
Section 10

31) of section 10, is not includible in the total income". (vi) It is pertinent to note that while most assessees having income from tea claimed deduction for cost of replantation of tea bushes under Rule 8(2) of the Income Tax Rules, some assessees started claiming depreciation

PLANT LIPIDS (P) LTD.,KADAYIRUPPU vs. DCIT , CORPORATE CIRCLE-2(1), KOCHI

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 598/COCH/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2020-21 Plant Lipids (P) Ltd. Kadayiruppu Po Kolenchery Dcit, Vs. Kerala 682 311 Corporate Circle-2(1) Kochi Pan No : Aabcp6061C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Thomson Thomas, A.R. Respondent By : Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.05.2025 O R D E R Perkeshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ao, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Dated 19.6.2024 Vide Din No.Itba/Ast/S/143(3)/2024- 25/1065876641(1) For The Ay 2020-21 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: Plant Lipids (P) Ltd., Kolencherry, Kerala Page 2 Of 8

For Appellant: Shri Thomson Thomas, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144(1)Section 144CSection 80GSection 92C

31, provides deduction on repairs and insurance of plant, machinery and furniture • Section 32 provides for depreciation on tangible assets like building, machinery, plant, furniture and also on intangible assets like know-how, patents, trademarks, licenses. • Section 33 allows development rebate on machinery, plants and ships. • Section 34 states conditions for depreciation and development rebate. • Section 35 grants deduction

DCIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. BRAHMOS AEROSPACE( THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filedby

ITA 742/COCH/2019[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Cochin23 Feb 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am Deputy Commissioner Brahmos Aerospace Of Income Tax, (Thiruvananthapuram) Ltd., Circle-1(1), V. Chackai, Thiruvananthapuram Beach Post, Kerala Tiruvananthapuram, Kerala Pan – Aabck2217K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv
Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 80

depreciation was allowed to be carried forward. It was fairly admitted by the Ld.Sr.DR that the assesseehas filed return of income within prescribed time although it was not supported by the audited accounts. It was submitted that the accounts of the assesse were audited much later on 05th February 2003. The Ld.Sr.DRrely on the ground Nos.3 and 5 and also

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

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

31) of section 10, is not Includible In the total income." ITA No.239 & 381/Coch/2018. 8 M/s.The Plantation Corpn. Of Kerala Ltd. & M/s.The Velimalai Rubber Co.Ltd. (iv) During this time, a controversy arose when some assessee's, in addition to claiming deduction for replantation as per Rule 8(2), also claimed depreciation

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

31) of section 10, is not Includible In the total income." ITA No.239 & 381/Coch/2018. 8 M/s.The Plantation Corpn. Of Kerala Ltd. & M/s.The Velimalai Rubber Co.Ltd. (iv) During this time, a controversy arose when some assessee's, in addition to claiming deduction for replantation as per Rule 8(2), also claimed depreciation

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

31,000 - Rs. 27,84,000/- Rs.19,04,000/- 33.33% Commission Rs. 25000 Rs. 47,06,000/- 2005-06 Rs.31, 67,000/- Rs.20,63,000/- NIL Rs. 11,04,000/- 33.33% 2006-07 Rs. 15,07,300/- Rs. 7,57,300/- NIL Rs. 7,50,000/- 33.33% 2007-08 Rs. 76,92,450/- Rs.67

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

31,000 - Rs. 27,84,000/- Rs.19,04,000/- 33.33% Commission Rs. 25000 Rs. 47,06,000/- 2005-06 Rs.31, 67,000/- Rs.20,63,000/- NIL Rs. 11,04,000/- 33.33% 2006-07 Rs. 15,07,300/- Rs. 7,57,300/- NIL Rs. 7,50,000/- 33.33% 2007-08 Rs. 76,92,450/- Rs.67

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

31,000 - Rs. 27,84,000/- Rs.19,04,000/- 33.33% Commission Rs. 25000 Rs. 47,06,000/- 2005-06 Rs.31, 67,000/- Rs.20,63,000/- NIL Rs. 11,04,000/- 33.33% 2006-07 Rs. 15,07,300/- Rs. 7,57,300/- NIL Rs. 7,50,000/- 33.33% 2007-08 Rs. 76,92,450/- Rs.67

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

31,000 - Rs. 27,84,000/- Rs.19,04,000/- 33.33% Commission Rs. 25000 Rs. 47,06,000/- 2005-06 Rs.31, 67,000/- Rs.20,63,000/- NIL Rs. 11,04,000/- 33.33% 2006-07 Rs. 15,07,300/- Rs. 7,57,300/- NIL Rs. 7,50,000/- 33.33% 2007-08 Rs. 76,92,450/- Rs.67

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

31,000 - Rs. 27,84,000/- Rs.19,04,000/- 33.33% Commission Rs. 25000 Rs. 47,06,000/- 2005-06 Rs.31, 67,000/- Rs.20,63,000/- NIL Rs. 11,04,000/- 33.33% 2006-07 Rs. 15,07,300/- Rs. 7,57,300/- NIL Rs. 7,50,000/- 33.33% 2007-08 Rs. 76,92,450/- Rs.67

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

31,000 - Rs. 27,84,000/- Rs.19,04,000/- 33.33% Commission Rs. 25000 Rs. 47,06,000/- 2005-06 Rs.31, 67,000/- Rs.20,63,000/- NIL Rs. 11,04,000/- 33.33% 2006-07 Rs. 15,07,300/- Rs. 7,57,300/- NIL Rs. 7,50,000/- 33.33% 2007-08 Rs. 76,92,450/- Rs.67

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

31,000 - Rs. 27,84,000/- Rs.19,04,000/- 33.33% Commission Rs. 25000 Rs. 47,06,000/- 2005-06 Rs.31, 67,000/- Rs.20,63,000/- NIL Rs. 11,04,000/- 33.33% 2006-07 Rs. 15,07,300/- Rs. 7,57,300/- NIL Rs. 7,50,000/- 33.33% 2007-08 Rs. 76,92,450/- Rs.67

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

31,000 - Rs. 27,84,000/- Rs.19,04,000/- 33.33% Commission Rs. 25000 Rs. 47,06,000/- 2005-06 Rs.31, 67,000/- Rs.20,63,000/- NIL Rs. 11,04,000/- 33.33% 2006-07 Rs. 15,07,300/- Rs. 7,57,300/- NIL Rs. 7,50,000/- 33.33% 2007-08 Rs. 76,92,450/- Rs.67

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

31,000 - Rs. 27,84,000/- Rs.19,04,000/- 33.33% Commission Rs. 25000 Rs. 47,06,000/- 2005-06 Rs.31, 67,000/- Rs.20,63,000/- NIL Rs. 11,04,000/- 33.33% 2006-07 Rs. 15,07,300/- Rs. 7,57,300/- NIL Rs. 7,50,000/- 33.33% 2007-08 Rs. 76,92,450/- Rs.67