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.

35 results for “depreciation”+ Section 153Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai93Amritsar45Bangalore36Delhi35Jaipur18Chennai18Karnataka14Cuttack12Guwahati7Lucknow5Visakhapatnam5Kolkata4Dehradun4Hyderabad3Ahmedabad3Pune3Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 153A87Section 143(3)33Addition to Income32Section 271(1)(c)28Section 26327Depreciation19Disallowance18Section 15315Section 4013Search & Seizure

AMBAWATT BUILDWELL PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT (C), GURGAON

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

ITA 2552/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Ambawatt Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., Vs Pr. Cit (C), Kh 267, 1St Floor, 7Th Floor, Hsiidc Building, Chatterpur Enclave, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V, Mehrauli, Gurgaon. New Delhi. Pan: Aagca0991B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Satpal Gulati, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.05.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17Th February, 2017 Passed U/S 263 Of The Act By The Cit, Central, Gurgaon, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Real Estate. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 30Th September, 2014, Declaring Nil Income. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Compulsory Scrutiny & A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued To The Assessee On 20Th September, 2015. Notice U/S 142(1) Along With A Questionnaire Was Also Issued On 12Th May, 2016. In Response To The Statutory Notices Issued By The Ao, The Assessee Appeared Before Him From Time To Time & Furnished Replies Which Were Kept On Record. The Ao, On The Basis Of Various Details Furnished Before Him, Disallowed An Amount Of Rs.3,91,936/- U/S 40A(3) Out Of Car Repairs & Maintenance & Determined The Total Loss Of The Assessee At Rs.94,25,270/- As Against The Returned Loss Of Rs.98,17,203/-.

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2

11
Limitation/Time-bar10
Section 144C9
Section 2(22)(e)
Section 263
Section 40A(3)

153B has two limbs for years of search covered under section 153C of the Act. 9.3.2 According to ld. Counsel for the assessee, the date of search in this case is 29.08.2013, as upheld by the ITAT in assessee’s own case and financial year is 2013-14. Therefore, if we compute the limitation in view of clause

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SUBASH DABAS, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessees are allowed

ITA 2399/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40Section 68Section 69

depreciation at Rs.31,255/- and 1/5th of repair and maintenance at Rs.20,495/- . Thus, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.19,19,39,700/-. 9. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee made elaborate submissions and filed an application under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short ‘the Rules) for admission

ADOBE SYSTEMS INDIA P.LTD,NOIDA vs. DCIT, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 928/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 43

depreciation in relation to lease rent. D. Reversal of provision for Rent Equalisation amounting to INR 46,87,009 2.9 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO and DRP have erred in not appreciating that out of the disallowance of INR 19, II ,08,847, an amount

SH. SANJAY DALMIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result all the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3795/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri SS Rana, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(b)

153B and section 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to the assessment or reassessment made under section 153A. It is also clarified that assessment or reassessment made under section 153A shall be subject to interest, penalty and prosecution, if applicable. In the assessment or reassessment made in respect of an assessment year under this section

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SOUL SPACE PROJECTS LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 193/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 193/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 1849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs Soul Space Projects Ltd., Central Circle-15, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura New Delhi-110055 Road, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F Co No. 271/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Co No. 284/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Soul Space Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura Central Circle-15, Road, New Delhi-110044 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(2)(b)

depreciation disallowance. 8. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 43,03,908/- made on account of disallowance of proportionate interest expenses. 9. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in deleting the addition

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SOUL SPACE PROJECTS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1849/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 193/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 1849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs Soul Space Projects Ltd., Central Circle-15, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura New Delhi-110055 Road, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F Co No. 271/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Co No. 284/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Soul Space Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura Central Circle-15, Road, New Delhi-110044 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(2)(b)

depreciation disallowance. 8. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 43,03,908/- made on account of disallowance of proportionate interest expenses. 9. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in deleting the addition

L.S CABLE INDIA PVT LTD ,REWARI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE13(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2572/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] L S Cable India Pvt.Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.28-31, Sector-5, Cirlce-13(1), Phase-Ii, Hsiidc Gc Bawal, New Delhi Rewari, Haryana-23501. Pan-Aabcl3621Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Gaurav Garg, Ca Respondent By Shri S.K.Jhadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 01.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

depreciation of comparable companies vis- à-vis the appellant. 8. That the Ld. AO/TPO/DRP has erred in the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law in not making appropriate adjustments to account for differences in working capital employed by the Appellant vis-a-vis the comparable while computing margins of comparable companies. 9. That on facts

M/S. MEROFORM (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4494/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

depreciation on car etc. Sale of Scrap - - - - - 1,74,23,441 3. Whereas on merits the assessee has challenged in the appeal for assessment year 2011-12 following two additions: - i) Addition on account of scrap sales: Rs.1,16,15,628/- ii) Disallowance on account of low declaration of income: Rs. 11,84,425/- 4. The assessee in the revenue

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MEROFORM INDIA PVT LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4633/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

depreciation on car etc. Sale of Scrap - - - - - 1,74,23,441 3. Whereas on merits the assessee has challenged in the appeal for assessment year 2011-12 following two additions: - i) Addition on account of scrap sales: Rs.1,16,15,628/- ii) Disallowance on account of low declaration of income: Rs. 11,84,425/- 4. The assessee in the revenue

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MEROFORM INDIA PVT LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4634/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

depreciation on car etc. Sale of Scrap - - - - - 1,74,23,441 3. Whereas on merits the assessee has challenged in the appeal for assessment year 2011-12 following two additions: - i) Addition on account of scrap sales: Rs.1,16,15,628/- ii) Disallowance on account of low declaration of income: Rs. 11,84,425/- 4. The assessee in the revenue

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MEROFORM INDIA PVT LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4635/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

depreciation on car etc. Sale of Scrap - - - - - 1,74,23,441 3. Whereas on merits the assessee has challenged in the appeal for assessment year 2011-12 following two additions: - i) Addition on account of scrap sales: Rs.1,16,15,628/- ii) Disallowance on account of low declaration of income: Rs. 11,84,425/- 4. The assessee in the revenue

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MEROFORM INDIA PVT LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4632/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

depreciation on car etc. Sale of Scrap - - - - - 1,74,23,441 3. Whereas on merits the assessee has challenged in the appeal for assessment year 2011-12 following two additions: - i) Addition on account of scrap sales: Rs.1,16,15,628/- ii) Disallowance on account of low declaration of income: Rs. 11,84,425/- 4. The assessee in the revenue

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MEROFORM INDIA PVT LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4631/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

depreciation on car etc. Sale of Scrap - - - - - 1,74,23,441 3. Whereas on merits the assessee has challenged in the appeal for assessment year 2011-12 following two additions: - i) Addition on account of scrap sales: Rs.1,16,15,628/- ii) Disallowance on account of low declaration of income: Rs. 11,84,425/- 4. The assessee in the revenue

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MEROFORM INDIA PVT LTD., NOIDA

In the result appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4630/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan CAFor Respondent: Smt. Shafali Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 40A

depreciation on car etc. Sale of Scrap - - - - - 1,74,23,441 3. Whereas on merits the assessee has challenged in the appeal for assessment year 2011-12 following two additions: - i) Addition on account of scrap sales: Rs.1,16,15,628/- ii) Disallowance on account of low declaration of income: Rs. 11,84,425/- 4. The assessee in the revenue

KRISHAN LAL MADHOK,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 15, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 6422/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2007-08]

For Appellant: Shri Priyanshu Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rocktim Saikia, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

depreciation penalty is not leviable. The additions in assessment proceedings will not automatically lead to inference of levying penalty. The Calcutta High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Suresh Chand Bansal, (2010) 329 ITR 330 (Cal) held that where there was an offer of additional income in the revised return filed by the assessee and such

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-19 vs. SHRI NEERAJ JINDAL

ITA/464/2016HC Delhi09 Feb 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 260Section 263Section 264Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

depreciation penalty is not leviable. The additions in assessment proceedings will not automatically lead to inference of levying penalty. The Calcutta High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Suresh Chand Bansal, (2010) 329 ITR 330 (Cal) held that where there was an offer of additional income in the revised return filed by the assessee and such

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-19 vs. SHRI ANKUR AGGARWAL

ITA/466/2016HC Delhi09 Feb 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 260Section 263Section 264Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

depreciation penalty is not leviable. The additions in assessment proceedings will not automatically lead to inference of levying penalty. The Calcutta High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Suresh Chand Bansal, (2010) 329 ITR 330 (Cal) held that where there was an offer of additional income in the revised return filed by the assessee and such

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-19 vs. SHRI ANKUR AGGARWAL

ITA/465/2016HC Delhi09 Feb 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 260Section 263Section 264Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

depreciation penalty is not leviable. The additions in assessment proceedings will not automatically lead to inference of levying penalty. The Calcutta High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Suresh Chand Bansal, (2010) 329 ITR 330 (Cal) held that where there was an offer of additional income in the revised return filed by the assessee and such

ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN SYRINGES & MEDICAL DEVICES LTD., FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5407/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J.S. Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Saroha, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153A

153B and section 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to the assessment made under this section; (ii) in an assessment or reassessment made in respect of an assessment year under this section, the tax shall be chargeable at the rate or rates as applicable to such assessment year.” In other words, the only condition for initiation

M/S. GLOBERIAN INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2265/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: S/Shri Rahul Khare & Rohan Khare, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 144CSection 254

depreciation 1,14,36,265 (As per para 3 above) ii) Addition under transfer pricing 4,12,04,919 adjustment as discussed in para 4.3 above TOTAL TAXABLE INOCME 5,26,41,184 3. Aggrieved with the order passed by the AO, the assessee company come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 4. We have