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.

46 results for “depreciation”+ Section 64clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,543Delhi1,374Bangalore586Chennai468Ahmedabad420Kolkata283Hyderabad148Chandigarh132Jaipur129Raipur121Pune75Cochin65Surat54Indore48Cuttack46Visakhapatnam41Lucknow39Rajkot36Ranchi35Nagpur26Karnataka25SC21Jodhpur17Amritsar15Allahabad11Agra10Guwahati9Telangana7Varanasi6Dehradun5Panaji4Calcutta3Patna3Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 1042Addition to Income26Disallowance14Charitable Trust14Depreciation9Natural Justice9Limitation/Time-bar8Condonation of Delay7Section 143(3)

B.C. BHUYAN CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE- 1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 356/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Girish Agrawalwalassessment Year : 2014-15 B.C.Bhuyan Construction Pvt B.C.Bhuyan Construction Pvt Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle Dcit, Corporate Circle - Ltd., Plot No.90, Palasuni, Ltd., Plot No.90, Palasuni, 1(1), Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aadcb 3304 N (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C.Sethi, Adv Revenue By Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Mahapatra, Saroj Kumar Mahapatra, Pr. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/07 7/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/0 /07/2023

For Appellant: Shri P.C.SethiFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Mahapatra
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

depreciation as claimed. 9. The next issue submitted by ld AR was that there was a survey on the premises of the assessee and in the course of survey, a diary was found and marked as BCBCPL-1. It was the submission that as per the said impounded material, it was found that the assessee has withdrawn large sums from

Showing 1–20 of 46 · Page 1 of 3

6
Section 1476
Section 2635
Section 1484

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 270/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 471/CTK/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 268/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 470/CTK/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 262/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 263/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 265/CTK/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 266/CTK/2019[2008--09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 267/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 269/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

RONALD EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 368/CTK/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 469/CTK/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 261/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 264/CTK/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

64,50,460/- and tax payable thereon including interest at Rs. 41,98,424/-. He has denied the exemption on the same grounds on which the Ld. CCIT has rejected the same u/s 10(23C)(vi) in proceedings of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (forming subject matter of adjudication in preceding paras). While doing so, the Assessing Officer observed

MS SHIVA JYOTI CONSTRUCTION,AT- PATTAMUNDAI vs. AO, NEAFC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 342/CTK/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2018-2019 2019 M/S. M/S. Shiva Shiva Jyoti Jyoti Vs. The The Assessing Assessing Officer, Officer, Construction, At: Patrapur, Construction, At: Patrapur, Nfac, Delhi Nfac, Delhi Pattamundai, Kendrapara Pattamundai, Kendrapara Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Abqfs 8602 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Sandeep Kumar Jena, Adv Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/0 06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/0 /06/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Kumar JenaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 44A

depreciation over a turnover of Rs. 1,03,64,,45,352.00 thereby disclose taxable income at Rs.3, 42, 42,760.00 in the return. The appellant also received interest income on income tax refund and fixed deposits made in order to procure works contract by way of earnest money and security deposits. The copy of the audited financial statements is enclosed

DCIT,CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/SD. SRB CONSULTANCY (P) LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 11/CTK/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Dillip Kumar MohantyFor Respondent: Shri S.K.Mohapatra
Section 24Section 68Section 69Section 80Section 80I

64,84,264/-made towards unexplained investment U/s. 69 read with Section 68, being just 86 proper be upheld 8& the departmental ground on this account be dismissed. 3. For that even if assuming but not admitting that as held by the CIT (A) the disclosed receipt of Rs. 29,61,593/- disclosed under the head business income voluntarily

INDUSTRIAL PROMOTION AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION OF ORISSA LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 141/CTK/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2007-2008 Industrial Promotion & Vs. Acit, Circle 1(1), Bhubaneswar. Investment Corpn. Of Orissa Ltd., Ipicol House, Janapath, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No.Aaaci 4814 J (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Sabat/B.K.Mohapatra, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263

depreciation of Rs.5,63,768/- under the normal provisions of the Income tax Act P a g e 2 | 4 ITA No.1 41/CTK/201 6 Assessm ent Y ear : 20 07- 200 8 and taxable book profit at Rs.2,64,44,612/- u/s.115JB of the Act. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section

NATIONAL ALUMINIUM COMPANY LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 62/CTK/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Girish Agrawalassessment Year : 2016-17 National National Aluminium Aluminium Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle -1(2), Company Limited., Nalco Company Limited., Nalco Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhawan, Bhawan, Nayapalli, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaacn 7449 M (Appellant) ) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Ca & Shri P. Venugopal Rao, Ca Venugopal Rao, Ca Revenue By : Dr.Abani Kanta Nayak, Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/11 11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/11 /11/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CA and Shri P. Venugopal Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr.Abani Kanta Nayak
Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 263Section 43B

section 143(3), assessment proceedings would be conducted manually. Yours faithfully. THAMBURAN THOZHAPILLAI AYYAMPERUMAl DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), BBSR 4. In Annexure to page 210, ld AR drew our attention to Question No.7, 9 & 10 as under: 1. From schedule DPM it is found that you have claimed additional depreciation on 15% block at Rs. 25,18,79,430/-. However

ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR vs. NATIONAL ALUMINIUM COMPANY LTD., BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and Revenue along

ITA 331/CTK/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.338/Ctk/2017 आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.39/Ctk/2019 आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.01/Ctk/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2009-2010, 2015-2016 & 2016-2017) National Aluminium Company Limited, Vs. Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Nalco Bhawan, P/1, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Pan No. : Aaacn 7449 M & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.331/Ctk/2017 आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.69/Ctk/2019 आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.65/Ctk/2020 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2009-2010, 2015-2016 & 2016-2017) National Aluminium Company Limited, Vs. Dcit/Acit, Nalco Bhawan, P/1, Nayapalli, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Pan No. : Aaacn 7449 M & Cross Objection No.11/Ctk/2019 Cross Objection No.02/Ctk/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.69/Ctk/2019 & 65/Ctk/2020) (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2015-2016 & 2016-2017) National Aluminium Company Limited, Vs. Dcit/Acit, Nalco Bhavan, P/1, Nayapalli, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Pan No. : Aaacn 7449 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri A.K.Sabat & B.K.Mahapatra, Cas : राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06/10/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/10/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue & Cross Objections By The Assessee, Against The Separate Orders Of The Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 30.12.2017, 27.12.2018 & 24.10.2019

section 14A read with Rule 8D and disallowed the expenditure as per formula provided under rule 8D. The assessee is stated to have made no fresh investments out of borrowed funds. The Assessing Officer appears to have calculated the disallowance as per Rule 8D(2)(iii) observing that administrative expenses cannot be denied to earn exempt income. We, however, find