Search: depreciation | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

2,498 results for “depreciation”+ Section 17(5)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,320 Delhi2,498 Bangalore1,341 Chennai1,174 Kolkata536 Ahmedabad439 Jaipur234 Hyderabad208 Indore121 Raipur119 Pune117 Chandigarh106 Karnataka99 Surat86 Cochin76 Visakhapatnam68 Cuttack65 SC63 Lucknow59 Rajkot48 Nagpur31 Telangana27 Guwahati22 Jodhpur22 Ranchi21 Amritsar17 Kerala16 Dehradun8 Varanasi8 Agra6 Patna6 Allahabad6 Panaji5 Jabalpur3 Calcutta3 Rajasthan2 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 Orissa1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 Punjab & Haryana1 D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 Gauhati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income57 Section 143(3)55 Section 115J39 Disallowance35 Section 14A34 Depreciation34 Deduction25 Section 14719 Section 8015 Section 148

CIT vs. ESCORTS HEART INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and those

ITA/175/2011HC Delhi16 Dec 2011

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

D o OJ QJ 'in in ro E i_ 4-1 o < <4- o ,,ro o ro LO o rM 00 ro VD ro Ln m o ro CO cn ro LD 00 ro If) Page

CIT vs. ESCORTS HEART INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and those

ITA - 175 / 2011HC Delhi16 Dec 2011

D o OJ QJ 'in in ro E i_ 4-1 o < <4- o ,,ro o ro LO o rM

DABUR INDIA LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

Showing 1–20 of 2,498 · Page 1 of 125

...

13

Section 143(2)10

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/579/2007HC Delhi01 Sept 2008

Bench: We Consider The Submissions Made In Support Of The Appeal The Following Facts Require To Be Noted:- 2.1 The Assessee Is In The Business Of Manufacturing Herbal Products & Cosmetics. On 30.11.2000 Assessee Filed Its Return For Assessment Year 2000-01 Wherein, It Declared An Income Of Rs 12,15,25,093/-. On 10.5.2001 The Return Was Processed Under Section 143(1)(A) Of The Act As The Returned Income. However, Notices Were Issued Under Section 143(2) Of The Act. 2.2 In Response To The Aforesaid Notices, Hearing Was Attended By An Authorized Representative Before The Assessing Officer. 2008:Dhc:2521

For Respondent: Mr R. D.Jolly

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 32Section 34Section 80Section 80I

depreciation subject to the provisions of sub-Section (2) of Section 72 and sub-Section (3) of Section 73 of the Act. Sections 30, 31 and 32 (A) to 35(E) provide for rebates, allowances and deductions under various heads. Section 36 provides for certain “other deductions” specified therein while, computing the income referred to in Section 28. Section

INTERNATIONAL HOSPITAL LIMITED vs. DCIT CIRCLE 12 (2)

ITA/116/2023HC Delhi26 Sept 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

d) order and the consequential notice under Section 148 issued pursuant to the aforesaid determination which for the first time came to be framed in the name of the resultant entity, Religare Enterprises Limited. Both the original Section 148 notice as well as the subsequent notice under Section 148A(b) were in the name of RSL. . Shorn of unnecessary details

CIT vs. NARESH TREHAN

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and those

ITA/2073/2010HC Delhi16 Dec 2011

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

d ITA No.400 of 2008, etc. Page 10 of49 ^7 managing the company. such an expenditure could not be treated as expenditure wholly or exclusively for the purposes of business. The difference between the premium paid and the surrender value received on assignment is substantial in respect of each policy. The assessee has not been able to justify assigning

VEDANTA LTD (SUCCESSOR TO CAIRN INDIA LTD),GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-26(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 6937/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Mishra, Senior DR

Section 115JSection 143Section 144CSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 928(1)

D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : The Appellant, M/s. Vedanta Ltd. (successor to Cairn India Ltd.) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the taxpayer’) by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 31.10.2017 passed by the AO in consonance with the orders passed by the ld. DRP/TPO under section 143 (3) read with section 144C

M/S. DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1380/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Sh. Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. Acit, 1711, S. P. Mukherjee Marg, Vs Central Circle – 29, Delhi-110006 New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd0132H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R. S. Singhavi, Ca Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Ca Respondent By Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28/08/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2020 Order

Section 115JSection 143Section 144CSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 36Section 43(5)(d)Section 80I

d) of proviso to section 43(5) as per Disallowance of loss AO: arising from sale of which transaction Page 9 Para 13.5 commodities on 5,74,71,113/ NA carried out on 6 commodity exchange - (Fresh issue) on account of DRP: recognized stock speculative loss u/s Page 21 Para 9.3 exchange shall be 43(5) of the Act considered

DCIT, CIRCLE-II(I) vs. I.F.C.I. LTD.,,

In the result ITA number 2205/Del/2005 filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2205/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2001-2002

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 139Section 142Section 143

d. In Commissioner of Income-tax v. Podar Cement (P.) Ltd,[1997] 92 Taxman 541 (SC), the Hon‟ble Apex Court held that the amendments to the definition of owner in Section 27 of the Act inserted w.e.f. from 1.4.1988 were to be read as retrospective. The Page 13 of 29 question before the court was whether the amendment introduced

IFCI LTD. vs. ADDL. CIT, CIRCLE-11(1),,

In the result ITA number 2205/Del/2005 filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2120/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2001-2002

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 139Section 142Section 143

d. In Commissioner of Income-tax v. Podar Cement (P.) Ltd,[1997] 92 Taxman 541 (SC), the Hon‟ble Apex Court held that the amendments to the definition of owner in Section 27 of the Act inserted w.e.f. from 1.4.1988 were to be read as retrospective. The Page 13 of 29 question before the court was whether the amendment introduced

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

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PETRONET LNG LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4902/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavadr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5230/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 5231/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5232/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Petronet Lng Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of First Floor, World Trade Centre, Income Tax, Circle-19(2), Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Ita No. 4902/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 4903/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4904/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Petronet Lng Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-19(2), First Floor, World Trade Centre, New Delhi Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.03.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 234C

17. Owing to the non-specificity of the “initial assessment year” which lead to conflicting interpretations, CBDT has clarified as to what constitutes initial assessment year with reference to Section 80IA(5) vide Circular No. 1 of 2016 dated 15.02.2016. Since, the Circular is clarificatory in nature, it is treated as applicable from the year, the statute came into force

PETRONET LNG LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5231/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavadr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5230/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 5231/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5232/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Petronet Lng Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of First Floor, World Trade Centre, Income Tax, Circle-19(2), Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Ita No. 4902/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 4903/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4904/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Petronet Lng Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-19(2), First Floor, World Trade Centre, New Delhi Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.03.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 234C

17. Owing to the non-specificity of the “initial assessment year” which lead to conflicting interpretations, CBDT has clarified as to what constitutes initial assessment year with reference to Section 80IA(5) vide Circular No. 1 of 2016 dated 15.02.2016. Since, the Circular is clarificatory in nature, it is treated as applicable from the year, the statute came into force

PETRONET LNG LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5232/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavadr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5230/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 5231/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5232/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Petronet Lng Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of First Floor, World Trade Centre, Income Tax, Circle-19(2), Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Ita No. 4902/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 4903/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4904/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Petronet Lng Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-19(2), First Floor, World Trade Centre, New Delhi Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.03.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 234C

17. Owing to the non-specificity of the “initial assessment year” which lead to conflicting interpretations, CBDT has clarified as to what constitutes initial assessment year with reference to Section 80IA(5) vide Circular No. 1 of 2016 dated 15.02.2016. Since, the Circular is clarificatory in nature, it is treated as applicable from the year, the statute came into force

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PETRONET LNG LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4903/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavadr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5230/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 5231/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5232/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Petronet Lng Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of First Floor, World Trade Centre, Income Tax, Circle-19(2), Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Ita No. 4902/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 4903/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4904/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Petronet Lng Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-19(2), First Floor, World Trade Centre, New Delhi Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.03.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 234C

17. Owing to the non-specificity of the “initial assessment year” which lead to conflicting interpretations, CBDT has clarified as to what constitutes initial assessment year with reference to Section 80IA(5) vide Circular No. 1 of 2016 dated 15.02.2016. Since, the Circular is clarificatory in nature, it is treated as applicable from the year, the statute came into force

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PETRONET LNG LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4904/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavadr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5230/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 5231/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5232/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Petronet Lng Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of First Floor, World Trade Centre, Income Tax, Circle-19(2), Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Ita No. 4902/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 4903/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4904/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Petronet Lng Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-19(2), First Floor, World Trade Centre, New Delhi Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.03.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 234C

17. Owing to the non-specificity of the “initial assessment year” which lead to conflicting interpretations, CBDT has clarified as to what constitutes initial assessment year with reference to Section 80IA(5) vide Circular No. 1 of 2016 dated 15.02.2016. Since, the Circular is clarificatory in nature, it is treated as applicable from the year, the statute came into force

PETRONET LNG LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5230/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavadr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5230/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 5231/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 5232/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Petronet Lng Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of First Floor, World Trade Centre, Income Tax, Circle-19(2), Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Ita No. 4902/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 4903/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4904/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Petronet Lng Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-19(2), First Floor, World Trade Centre, New Delhi Babar Road, Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp8148D Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.03.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 234C

17. Owing to the non-specificity of the “initial assessment year” which lead to conflicting interpretations, CBDT has clarified as to what constitutes initial assessment year with reference to Section 80IA(5) vide Circular No. 1 of 2016 dated 15.02.2016. Since, the Circular is clarificatory in nature, it is treated as applicable from the year, the statute came into force

MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT LTU, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4275/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishimahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd, Dcit Ltu, 9, Cgo Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Vs. New Delhi Pan:Aaacm.828R (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Ltu, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd, New Delhi 9, Cgo Complex, Lodhi Road, Vs. New Delhi Pan:Aaacm.828R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Renuka Jain Gupta, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

d. Telex services e. Telegraph services f. Facsimile services g. Private teased circuit services o. Other Note- Provision of 64 KBPS V-SAT based telecom networks for dosed user groups is considered as a value added service. Provision of radio-based mobile voice telephone services is considered as a Value Added Service. Keeping in view the above, for a subscriber

PCL FOODS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDI CIT, NATIONAL E- ASSESMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 442/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17] Pcl Foods Private Limited, Additional / Joint/ Unit No.-219, Plot No. 2, Deputy/Assistant Vardhman Crown Mall, Lsc, Vs Commissioner Of Income Sector 19, Dwarka, New Tax/ Income Tax Officer, Delhi-110075. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi. Pan- Aahcp3493L Assessee Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 92C

Depreciation Claim II. Investments/advances/loans III. International transaction(s) 4. In this case, a reference dated 01.11.2018 was made to the Transfer pricing Officer (TPO) under Section 92CA(1) of the Act, by the ITO, ward 19(2), New Delhi to determine the Arm’s length price in respect of international transactions undertaken by the assessee company with its Associates Enterprises

AREVA T & D INDIA LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the assessee and

ITA-315/2010HC Delhi30 Mar 2012

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(2)(ii)

D Holdings SA France (hereinafter referred as the „transferee‟) w.e.f. 1st April, 2004 pursuant to transfer under a slump sale agreement dated 30th June, 2004. (iii) Under the transfer/slump sale agreement, the business was transferred by the transferor lock, stock and barrel to the assessee Company. However, the transferor retained its „trademark‟. (iv) The business of the transferor was acquired

BSC C&C JV,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-62(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4546/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. Bsc C&C Joint Venture, Vs. Acit, 74, Hemkunt Colony, Circle-62(1), New Delhi-110048 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadfb8115G Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain, Adv Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv Revenue By: Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 05/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

d) The claim can be made only through return of income by referring to the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd reported in 284 ITR 323(SC). e) There was no reasonable and sufficient cause which prevented the assessee from making the claim of deduction in the return of income. 5. The learned