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.

2 results for “depreciation”+ Section 260Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi390Karnataka127Mumbai81Bangalore47Kolkata43Calcutta35Amritsar33Chennai33Telangana31Kerala18Ahmedabad16SC16Jaipur10Punjab & Haryana9Chandigarh6Pune6Lucknow5Cuttack5Hyderabad5Indore5Orissa4Nagpur2Cochin2Jabalpur2Gauhati2Raipur1Rajasthan1Visakhapatnam1Surat1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Tripura1

Key Topics

Section 92C3Section 142A2Section 143(3)2Section 115J2Section 352Addition to Income2

M/S.APOLLO TYRES LTD,COCHIN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, COCHIN

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

ITA 609/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Apollo Tyres Ltd. .......... Appellant 3Rd Floor, Areekal Mansion, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aaaca6990Q] Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Kochi ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv. Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35Section 43(1)Section 92C

depreciation; the question is whether the claim of the assessee conforms the deduction permissible under Section 37(1) of the Act. In the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the view that the preoperative expenses amounting to Rs.26,97,79,538/- incurred by the assessee are revenue expenses, and are correctly so held by the Tribunal

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.MFAR HOTELS LTD, COCHIN

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 66/COCH/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Sept 2019AY 2002-03

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

For Appellant: Sri. K.T.MohananFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR
Section 142ASection 142A(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69B

260A of the income-tax Act, 1961 was pending before the Rajasthan High Court.” ITA No.66-67/Coch/2017 & CO 16/C/2017. 17 M/s.Mfar Hotels & Resorts (P) Ltd. 7.5 Admittedly, section 142A of the I.T.Act is a procedural provision and applies to pending assessments. In the instant case, the reference u/s 142A of the I.T.Act to the DVO was made