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.

264 results for “depreciation”+ Rectification u/s 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai306Delhi264Bangalore166Chennai92Kolkata68Ahmedabad37Lucknow26Pune25Jaipur24Hyderabad23Chandigarh22Cochin15Visakhapatnam13Indore7Panaji7Raipur7Rajkot5Amritsar5Jodhpur4Karnataka4Nagpur3SC3Surat3Guwahati2Cuttack2Dehradun2Himachal Pradesh1Telangana1Patna1Agra1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 154124Section 143(3)118Section 143(1)72Addition to Income58Depreciation55Section 14749Disallowance46Rectification u/s 15438Deduction34Section 80I

HERO FINCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 11(1), DELHI, C.R. BUILDING

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

ITA 2542/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 251(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

rectification order under section 154 rectifying the\nassessment order wherein erroneous addition was made under section 56(2)(viib)\nof the Act despite the said section being not applicable to issuance of shares to non-\nresident investors.\n16. That the NFAC grossly erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that, since the\nshares were issued to non-residents

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANANT RAJ LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

ITA 5237/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 264 · Page 1 of 14

...
26
Section 271(1)(c)26
Section 153C26
ITAT Delhi
27 Nov 2020
AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA; Ms
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50

depreciation claimed on the block of assets by following the assessment order for the AY 2009-10. Since we have dismissed the appeal of the revenue for the said assessment year as above, by following the order in the said appeal, this appeal of the revenue is also dismissed. Assessee’s appeal no. 4736/Del/2017 34. Now we will take

ANANT RAJ LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

ITA 4736/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA; Ms
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50

depreciation claimed on the block of assets by following the assessment order for the AY 2009-10. Since we have dismissed the appeal of the revenue for the said assessment year as above, by following the order in the said appeal, this appeal of the revenue is also dismissed. Assessee’s appeal no. 4736/Del/2017 34. Now we will take

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ANANT RAJ LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed partly as indicated above

ITA 5238/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA; Ms
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50

depreciation claimed on the block of assets by following the assessment order for the AY 2009-10. Since we have dismissed the appeal of the revenue for the said assessment year as above, by following the order in the said appeal, this appeal of the revenue is also dismissed. Assessee’s appeal no. 4736/Del/2017 34. Now we will take

DCIT, GURGAON vs. SH. CHANCHAL SINGH DHEK, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5945/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaand. Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2005-06 Dcit Vs. Sh. Chanchal Singh Dhek Circle -1 (1) Prop. M/S. Great Roadways Gurgaon Anaj Mandi Chowk, Gurgaon Pan No. Aaopd6087G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 154Section 194C(3)Section 40Section 44B

depreciation on motor car and Rs.354/- on account of disallowance u/s. 44B. Subsequently the AO found that assessee has debited lorry hire charges to the extent of Rs.1,66,43,122/-on which no TDS was deducted by the assessee. He, therefore, issued a notice u/s. 154 of the IT Act. Since there was no compliance from the side

RISHABH MINING PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-21(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3050/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 249(2)

154 of the Act, seeking rectification of the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act. 6. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the claim of the depreciation

RISHABH MINING PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-21(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3048/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 249(2)

154 of the Act, seeking rectification of the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act. 6. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the claim of the depreciation

RISHABH MINING PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-21(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3049/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 249(2)

154 of the Act, seeking rectification of the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act. 6. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the claim of the depreciation

RISHABH MINING PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-21(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3051/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 249(2)

154 of the Act, seeking rectification of the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act. 6. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the claim of the depreciation

NHPC LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 433/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu, Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 115JSection 154Section 234B

154 in so far as "depreciation" is concerned, is also without jurisdiction. 14. Therefore, we are of the view that the rectification provisions invoked by the Assessing Officer are not correct. Therefore we reverse the order of CIT (A) on these count. In the result ground 1 to 3 of the appeal are allowed. 15. Ground

ADM AGRO INDUSTRIES LATUR AND VIZAG PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4446/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Adm Agro Industries Latur & Vizag Vs Dcit, Pvt.Ltd., (Previously Known As Tinna Circle-1(2), Oil & Chemicals Pvt.Ltd.), New Delhi-110002. B-1, Khaitan House, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110024. Pan-Aaact0700F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. & Sh. Tarun Chanana, Adv. Respondent By Mrs. Alka Gautam, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 31.12.2021

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32(2)

rectification order passed by the AO u/s 154 of the Act dated 16.03.2016 is barred by limitation as the assessment order cannot be rectified by a notice u/s 154 dated 07.03.2016, which is admittedly beyond the [Assessment Year : 2007-08] period of four years as stipulated in section 154. Hence the order u/s 154 is barred by limitation, and hence

M/S. LAXMAN DAS & SONS,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, BULANDSHAHR

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

ITA 2289/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154

depreciation and framing the impugned assessment order which is contrary to law and facts and without providing adequate opportunity of hearing and without confronting the entire adverse material which was used against the assessee and by recording incorrect facts and findings and in violation of principles of natural justice and the and the same is not sustainable on various legal

TATA TELESERVICES LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 25(1), DELHI

In the result, Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2548/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Before Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Tata Teleservices Limited Assistant Jeevan Bharati Tower 1, Commissioner Of 10Th Floor, 124, Connaught Vs. Income Tax, Circle Circus, New Delhi 25(1), C. R. Building, Pan No:Aaact2438A Ip Estate, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 201(1)Section 253Section 35A

depreciation of Rs. 4,23,19,13,876/- was allowed to the Assessee. 3. A separate proceedings u/s 154 of the Act was initialed by the A.O. for Assessment Year 2016-17 alleging that the Assessee has been allowed excess deduction of Rs. 156,80,67,260/- u/s 35ABB of the Act. The A.O. was of the opinion that

FRESENIUS KABI ONCOLOGY LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-9(3), NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 605/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Manish Agarwalfresenius Kabi Oncology Ltd. Income Tax Officer, B-310, Som Dutt Chamber, Ward-9(3), Bhikaji Cama Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110066. Pan-Aabcd7720L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

depreciation claimed thereon. 6.1 That the AO erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that subsidy received from the State Government was on capital account and was not directly or indirectly related to meeting any portion of the cost of any fixed asset. 6.2 That the AO erred on facts and in law in not following the binding

PRAYAS TRACON LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3627/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sudhir Pareeka.Yr. : 2008-09 Prayas Tracon Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii, (Now Known As With M/S Srs Faridabad Banquets & Resorts Ltd., D-28, South Extension, Part-I New Delhi – 110 049 (Pan: Aaccp8383L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Surender pal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 154

rectification u/s 154 of the Act stating therein that while framing the assessment order benefit of carried forward losses/ depreciation

ADROITEC INFORMATION SYSTEM P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), NEW DELHIO

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 2472/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaadroitec Information System P. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 1 (1), A – 43A, Shop No.3, New Delhi. Panchsheel Vihar, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi – 110 017. (Pan : Aaach2422A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nitin Goyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.01.2024 Date Of Order : 10.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154

154 of the Act. 3.2 The Ld. AO has erred in missing to note that while no adverse remark was made in the assessment order u/s 143(3) regarding claim of the appellant on for carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation for AY 2001-02, it is the original rectification

ACIT, MORADABAD vs. M/S. JUBILANT ORGANOSYES LTD., J.P. NAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2513/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Sept 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Verma, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri K.M. Gupta, Adv. & Ms. Poonam
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 154(7)Section 251

depreciation of Rs.35,93,46,010/-. 3. 26.07.2007 Application u/s. 154 was filed by the assessee vide application dated 26.07.2007. 4. 17.03.2008 Order u/s.154 was passed on the said application dated 26.07.2007 5. 25.06.2008 Appeal filed against order u/s.143(3) was decided 6. 12.08.2008 Assessing Officer passed order giving effect & of order of ld. CIT(A) u/s.251/143(3)/154

M/S. CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeals filed by the assessee for both the Assessment Years stand allowed

ITA 5101/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rs Syal & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2007-08 & A.Y. 2008-09

Section 143Section 154Section 32

depreciation is wrong. 3.2. In rectification proceedings u/s 154 of the Act Ld.AO observed that it was deferred revenue expenditure

M/S. CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeals filed by the assessee for both the Assessment Years stand allowed

ITA 5098/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rs Syal & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2007-08 & A.Y. 2008-09

Section 143Section 154Section 32

depreciation is wrong. 3.2. In rectification proceedings u/s 154 of the Act Ld.AO observed that it was deferred revenue expenditure

LNG SECURITIES SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3708/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jul 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri C.M. Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. V.V. Kale, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Yogesh Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 234A

rectification application was rejected. Aggrieved by the rejection of application u/s. 154, the assessee appealed before the first appellate authority and the first 5 ITA No.3708/Del./2013 appellate authority upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the appellant filed appeal before the ITAT. 5. During the course of hearing, the appellant submitted written