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.

52 results for “depreciation”+ Section 43(6)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,719Delhi1,606Bangalore707Ahmedabad499Chennai471Kolkata335Jaipur211Hyderabad184Chandigarh174Pune161Raipur134Indore89Visakhapatnam80Karnataka73Amritsar65Surat56Cuttack53Cochin52Guwahati39SC37Lucknow34Rajkot33Ranchi23Jodhpur20Nagpur18Telangana16Agra13Kerala12Allahabad11Panaji9Dehradun9Patna9Varanasi5Calcutta4Orissa1Rajasthan1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)37Addition to Income35Section 153C28Section 80I27Section 153A23Disallowance23Section 14A22Section 14819Deduction18Section 132

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

43, Kottayam-686001 PAN : AAACT7596H. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Iype John Respondent by : Sri.Mritunjaya Sharma, Sr.DR Date of Pronouncement : 02.03.2020 Date of Hearing : 02.03.2020 O R D E R Per George George K, JM : These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against two orders of the CIT(A), both dated 30.10.2019. The relevant assessment years

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

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

Showing 1–20 of 52 · Page 1 of 3

16
Section 14714
Depreciation14
ITA 1/COCH/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed
ITAT Cochin
02 Mar 2020
AY 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

43, Kottayam-686001 PAN : AAACT7596H. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Iype John Respondent by : Sri.Mritunjaya Sharma, Sr.DR Date of Pronouncement : 02.03.2020 Date of Hearing : 02.03.2020 O R D E R Per George George K, JM : These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against two orders of the CIT(A), both dated 30.10.2019. The relevant assessment years

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

section 43(3) where the Legislature has accepted that the entire cost of replanting is fully allowed as a deduction in lieu of depreciation. Replantation Expenses were disallowed only where the Replantation was undertaken in an abandoned area. Kindly refer to 262 ITR 388 which is at running pages 31 to 32 of this argument note. Please see para

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

section 43(3) where the Legislature has accepted that the entire cost of replanting is fully allowed as a deduction in lieu of depreciation. Replantation Expenses were disallowed only where the Replantation was undertaken in an abandoned area. Kindly refer to 262 ITR 388 which is at running pages 31 to 32 of this argument note. Please see para

M/S AC CARGO MANAGEMENT P.LTD,,COCHIN vs. THE ITO, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 320/COCH/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri George George. K.] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 320/Coch/2013. िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008. Vs. M/S. Ac Cargo Management The Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd, Ward 1(1) 1St Floor, Chacko Chambers, Kochi Civil Lines Road, Palarivattom, Kochi 682 025. [Pan Aaeca 2206K] (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/Appellant) अपीलाथ" (ू"यथ" ू"यथ" ू"यथ"/Respondent) ू"यथ"

For Appellant: Shri. R. Krishnan, C.A
Section 194Section 194CSection 194ISection 40

depreciation on the vehicle at the rate which is provided under the Appendix for Plant and Machinery. But that classification cannot be stretched to determine the nature of services provided which is otherwise clear from the agreement between the parties. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Indian National Ship Owners’ Association (supra) has held that

M/S.COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD,COCHIN vs. THE ADCIT, COCHIN

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 310/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

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

Section 143(3)Section 80I

depreciation to 10%. The Ld CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee by following the decision rendered by the tribunal in the following cases:- (a) JCIT Vs. National Airport Authority of India (2008-TIOL-135-ITAT-DEL) (b) HAL Vs. ACIT in ITA No.776/Bang/86 by Bangalore bench of ITAT. Since a particular view has been taken by the above

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M.S COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 190/COCH/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Nov 2019AY 2005-06

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

Section 143(3)Section 80I

depreciation to 10%. The Ld CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee by following the decision rendered by the tribunal in the following cases:- (a) JCIT Vs. National Airport Authority of India (2008-TIOL-135-ITAT-DEL) (b) HAL Vs. ACIT in ITA No.776/Bang/86 by Bangalore bench of ITAT. Since a particular view has been taken by the above

COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 344/COCH/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

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

Section 143(3)Section 80I

depreciation to 10%. The Ld CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee by following the decision rendered by the tribunal in the following cases:- (a) JCIT Vs. National Airport Authority of India (2008-TIOL-135-ITAT-DEL) (b) HAL Vs. ACIT in ITA No.776/Bang/86 by Bangalore bench of ITAT. Since a particular view has been taken by the above

SMT.K.B.SONY,COCHIN vs. THE DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, i) The appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 320/COCH/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 May 2018AY 2009-10

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

Section 69

depreciation and unabsorbed investment allowance for limited period in case of certain domestic companies. Section 35 deals with expenditure on scientific research, section 35A deals with expenditure on acquisition of patent right or copy right. Section 35AB deals with expenditure on know-how. Section 35ABB deals with expenditure for obtaining licence to operate telecommunication services. Section 35AC deals with expenditure

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.SUD CHEMIE INDIA P. LTD, ALUVA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 3/COCH/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

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

c), the outstanding contracts as at balance sheet date, other than forward contracts to hedge existing receivables, to which accounting standard 11 “the Effects of changes in Foreign Exchange Rates” applies, have been marked to market as on 31st March, 2008 and the exchange loss arising on the same amounting to Rs.2,42,06,625/- have been provided

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.SUD CHEMIE INDIA P. LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 41/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

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

c), the outstanding contracts as at balance sheet date, other than forward contracts to hedge existing receivables, to which accounting standard 11 “the Effects of changes in Foreign Exchange Rates” applies, have been marked to market as on 31st March, 2008 and the exchange loss arising on the same amounting to Rs.2,42,06,625/- have been provided

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

6. The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and peruse the record. In this case, the assessment year involved is 2006-07. Rule 8D was introduced with effect from 24/03/2008 which was prospective in operation and cannot be applied retrospectively as held by the Delhi High Court

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

6. The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and peruse the record. In this case, the assessment year involved is 2006-07. Rule 8D was introduced with effect from 24/03/2008 which was prospective in operation and cannot be applied retrospectively as held by the Delhi High Court

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

6. The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and peruse the record. In this case, the assessment year involved is 2006-07. Rule 8D was introduced with effect from 24/03/2008 which was prospective in operation and cannot be applied retrospectively as held by the Delhi High Court

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

6. The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and peruse the record. In this case, the assessment year involved is 2006-07. Rule 8D was introduced with effect from 24/03/2008 which was prospective in operation and cannot be applied retrospectively as held by the Delhi High Court

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), THRISSUR, THRISSUR vs. M/S.KERALA COMMUNICATORS CABLE LTD, THRISSUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed and

ITA 271/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sri. P.K.JayanFor Respondent: Sri.Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha
Section 143(3)

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, revenue and expense shall follow matching concept, the claim of assessee of depreciation at such higher rates is proper. 5) Alternatively, cost of digital set top boxes shall be allowed in full as revenue expenditure. 6) It is not true that needed documents/details were not furnished to the Assessing Officer. All needed

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M.S COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

ITA 193/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: 22.08.2024
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

c) or u/s 36(1) (iii) r.w.s 37 of the Act, from making interest-free advances from out of interest- free funds, if such payments are made towards business purposes and if such payments have been made towards specified intents. yy) The following represent the statutory positions for the impugned A.Y. 2011-12 : (i) Section 14A of the Act provides

THEDCIT, COCHIN vs. M.S COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

ITA 304/COCH/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: 22.08.2024
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

c) or u/s 36(1) (iii) r.w.s 37 of the Act, from making interest-free advances from out of interest- free funds, if such payments are made towards business purposes and if such payments have been made towards specified intents. yy) The following represent the statutory positions for the impugned A.Y. 2011-12 : (i) Section 14A of the Act provides

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

ITA 167/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: 22.08.2024
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

c) or u/s 36(1) (iii) r.w.s 37 of the Act, from making interest-free advances from out of interest- free funds, if such payments are made towards business purposes and if such payments have been made towards specified intents. yy) The following represent the statutory positions for the impugned A.Y. 2011-12 : (i) Section 14A of the Act provides

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, COCHIN

ITA 166/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: 22.08.2024
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

c) or u/s 36(1) (iii) r.w.s 37 of the Act, from making interest-free advances from out of interest- free funds, if such payments are made towards business purposes and if such payments have been made towards specified intents. yy) The following represent the statutory positions for the impugned A.Y. 2011-12 : (i) Section 14A of the Act provides