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.

43 results for “depreciation”+ Section 194Iclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai46Delhi43Kolkata22Raipur17Bangalore15Ahmedabad6Cochin6Visakhapatnam6Jaipur5

Key Topics

Section 14A37Section 143(3)27Disallowance22Section 80A18Depreciation17Addition to Income17Deduction15Section 4012Section 14212Section 80I

VALUE FIRST DIGITAL MEDIA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-26(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 487/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40Section 72ASection 9Section 9(1)(vi)

section 194I. During the year assessee had Income from Other Sources of Rs. 1,46,96,961/- and unabsorbed depreciation

M/S VALUE FIRST DIGITAL MEDIA PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 4389/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3

11
TDS10
Section 1479
21 Nov 2019
AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40Section 72ASection 9Section 9(1)(vi)

section 194I. During the year assessee had Income from Other Sources of Rs. 1,46,96,961/- and unabsorbed depreciation

CONNAUGHT PLAZA RESTAURANTS PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-73(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 993/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar Varma, Sr.D.R
Section 133ASection 194CSection 194ISection 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

194I of the Act as the same are being paid for work_earried out for maintenance of common areas/ facilities available alongwith leased premise; 4.4. That the C1T(A)/ assessing officer erred in not appreciating that though rent and CAM charges were paid in accordance with the same agreement, however both rent payable and CAM charges were distinctly defined

CONNAUGHT PLAZA RESTAURANTS PVT. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-73(1), DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1984/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar Varma, Sr.D.R
Section 133ASection 194CSection 194ISection 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

194I of the Act as the same are being paid for work_earried out for maintenance of common areas/ facilities available alongwith leased premise; 4.4. That the C1T(A)/ assessing officer erred in not appreciating that though rent and CAM charges were paid in accordance with the same agreement, however both rent payable and CAM charges were distinctly defined

M/S ACTIVE SECURITIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 2335/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Puneet Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 24

depreciation is clearly admissible in terms of section 57(ii) of the Act. His reliance on Jay Metal Industries (P) Ltd. vs. CIT: 396 ITR 194 (Del), Oriental Building & Furnishing Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT: 53 ITD 198 (Del Trib.), Serendipity Apparels (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO: 78 Taxmann. Com 154 (Ahmedabad - Trib.), is appropriate. 13.5 It may be noted that leased

INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI vs. R L STEEL AND ENERGY LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3109/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshincome Tax Officer, Vs. Rl Steel & Energy Ltd, New Delhi 70, Daryaganj, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacr5809B Assessee By : Shri Akhilesh Bhargava, Ca Revenue By: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 11/03/2026

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Bhargava, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43(5)

194I of the Act as the percentage of tax remain the same. The Learned CIT(A) also took cognizance of the order relied upon by the tribunal in assessee’s own case for assessment year 2007-08 to 2009-10 in ITA Nos. 5784 & 5785/ Del / 2012 and 1838/Del/2013 dated 5-2-2018 in support of the contentions

NOIDA SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE AUTHORITY,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, the assessing officer is directed to allow both the disallowances

ITA 6541/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6540/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 (Physical Hearing) Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Circle-2, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, A-Block, Sector-24, Pan No.Aaaln0639A Noida, Uttar Pradesh. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6541/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit,Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6732/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Acit, बनाम Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By Shri Ram Avtar Sharma, Ca & Shri Bhupesh Agarwal, Ca Revenue By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement On 12.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh:

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 34Section 80ASection 80I

depreciation of Rs.35,98,500/- and disallowed lease rental of Rs. 22,32,038/- paid to Noida Authority for the want of TDS under section 194I

NOIDA SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE AUTHORITY,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NOIDA

In the result, the assessing officer is directed to allow both the disallowances

ITA 6540/DEL/2018[20101-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6540/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 (Physical Hearing) Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Circle-2, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, A-Block, Sector-24, Pan No.Aaaln0639A Noida, Uttar Pradesh. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6541/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit,Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6732/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Acit, बनाम Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By Shri Ram Avtar Sharma, Ca & Shri Bhupesh Agarwal, Ca Revenue By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement On 12.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh:

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 34Section 80ASection 80I

depreciation of Rs.35,98,500/- and disallowed lease rental of Rs. 22,32,038/- paid to Noida Authority for the want of TDS under section 194I

ACIT, CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. NOIDA SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE AUTHORITY, NOIDA

In the result, the assessing officer is directed to allow both the disallowances

ITA 6732/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6540/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 (Physical Hearing) Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Circle-2, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, A-Block, Sector-24, Pan No.Aaaln0639A Noida, Uttar Pradesh. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6541/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit,Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6732/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Acit, बनाम Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By Shri Ram Avtar Sharma, Ca & Shri Bhupesh Agarwal, Ca Revenue By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement On 12.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh:

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 34Section 80ASection 80I

depreciation of Rs.35,98,500/- and disallowed lease rental of Rs. 22,32,038/- paid to Noida Authority for the want of TDS under section 194I

DLF LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2677/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 133ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 144Section 146Section 250

Section 41(1) the assessee should have obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever, any amount in respect of the loss or expenditure earlier allowed as a deduction. This part of the reasoning, in the light of the amended clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 41 may not be relevant after substitution of the said

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DLF LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3061/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 133ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 144Section 146Section 250

Section 41(1) the assessee should have obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever, any amount in respect of the loss or expenditure earlier allowed as a deduction. This part of the reasoning, in the light of the amended clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 41 may not be relevant after substitution of the said

SHRI M M CREATIONS,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 5641/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai & M. M. Creations Acit T-481A, Baljeet Nagar Circle-24(1), Behind Patel Nagar Police Station New Delhi Vs. New Delhi. Pan : Aaefm9802A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. SinghviFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 56Section 56(2)(iii)

Section 194I is not conclusive of taxability of the related income under the head ‘income from house property’. The conclusions arrived at by the Ld. CIT (A) thus do not call for any interference.” 24. Respectfully following decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd vs CIT (supra) and discussions herein above

R.L. STEEL & ENERGY LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 3 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 2418/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gayasuddhin Ansari, Sr. DR

depreciation on reheating furnace and pollution control equipment. 5. That orders passed by learned CIT (A) and learned Assessing Officer are against the principles of natural justice.” [ 9. Grounds of appeal Nos.1 and 5 being general in nature are dismissed. Ground of appeal No.2 was not pressed by the ld. Counsel for the assessee for which

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 226/Del/2011 (Arising Ita No.2720/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ankit Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

Depreciation not to be allowed on these assets in the light of the order of Mumbai High Court in CIT vs. Techno Shares & Stocks Ltd. 225 CTR 337 (Mumbai). 12. She then drew our attention to provisions of section 37(1) and submitted that section 37(1) expressly forbids the claim of expenses that are capital in nature. The payment

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 4202/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 226/Del/2011 (Arising Ita No.2720/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ankit Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

Depreciation not to be allowed on these assets in the light of the order of Mumbai High Court in CIT vs. Techno Shares & Stocks Ltd. 225 CTR 337 (Mumbai). 12. She then drew our attention to provisions of section 37(1) and submitted that section 37(1) expressly forbids the claim of expenses that are capital in nature. The payment

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

ITA 2572/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mukesh Kumar Jha, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)

section 32 of the Act shall be 'beneficial ownership' contrary to 'registered ownership'. and it is pertinent to note that the assessee has always been allowed depreciation in respect of the said building in subsequent AYs as well, viz., AYs 2020-21 & 2021-22. In fact in subsequent AYs 2020-21 and 2021-22, the assessing officer allowed the claim

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

ITA 2567/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mukesh Kumar Jha, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)

section 32 of the Act shall be 'beneficial ownership' contrary to 'registered ownership'. and it is pertinent to note that the assessee has always been allowed depreciation in respect of the said building in subsequent AYs as well, viz., AYs 2020-21 & 2021-22. In fact in subsequent AYs 2020-21 and 2021-22, the assessing officer allowed the claim

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI, DELHI

ITA 2566/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mukesh Kumar Jha, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)

section 32 of the Act shall be 'beneficial ownership' contrary to 'registered ownership'. and it is pertinent to note that the assessee has always been allowed depreciation in respect of the said building in subsequent AYs as well, viz., AYs 2020-21 & 2021-22. In fact in subsequent AYs 2020-21 and 2021-22, the assessing officer allowed the claim

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), DELHI vs. INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 2911/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mukesh Kumar Jha, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)

section 32 of the Act shall be 'beneficial ownership' contrary to 'registered ownership'. and it is pertinent to note that the assessee has always been allowed depreciation in respect of the said building in subsequent AYs as well, viz., AYs 2020-21 & 2021-22. In fact in subsequent AYs 2020-21 and 2021-22, the assessing officer allowed the claim

INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

ITA 2573/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mukesh Kumar Jha, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)

section 32 of the Act shall be 'beneficial ownership' contrary to 'registered ownership'. and it is pertinent to note that the assessee has always been allowed depreciation in respect of the said building in subsequent AYs as well, viz., AYs 2020-21 & 2021-22. In fact in subsequent AYs 2020-21 and 2021-22, the assessing officer allowed the claim