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.

2,778 results for “depreciation”+ Section 30clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,110Delhi2,778Bangalore1,134Chennai922Kolkata645Ahmedabad430Hyderabad250Jaipur241Karnataka174Pune159Raipur156Chandigarh144Amritsar95Indore90Surat78Visakhapatnam65Rajkot59SC54Lucknow50Cuttack45Cochin45Ranchi38Nagpur35Telangana34Guwahati31Jodhpur27Kerala19Patna17Dehradun15Calcutta12Panaji9Agra8Varanasi7Allahabad7Jabalpur5Punjab & Haryana2Rajasthan2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Gauhati1Tripura1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Orissa1

Key Topics

Addition to Income68Section 143(3)50Disallowance46Depreciation41Section 14A39Deduction34Section 115J23Section 14723Section 143(1)16Section 43(1)

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S HI LINE PENS P.LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/1202/2006HC Delhi15 Sept 2008

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata BansalFor Respondent: Mr Rakesh Gupta, Ms PoonamAhuja
Section 30Section 31Section 32

depreciation under Section 32 of the said Act?” 3. The counsel for the parties agreed that no paper books would be necessary and that this appeal be heard straight away. 4. The facts of the case are that the assessee had claimed the aforesaid expenditure of Rs.14,03,835/- as a deduction under Section 30

DABUR INDIA LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

The appeals are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 2,778 · Page 1 of 139

...
15
Section 6814
Section 80I12
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

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)

30 of 31 14. In view of the above discussion, we are of the view that the specified intangible assets acquired under slump sale agreement were in the nature of “business or commercial rights of similar nature” specified in Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act and were accordingly eligible for depreciation

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3076/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2006-07

Section 10BSection 29Section 32Section 32(2)Section 43A

depreciation and that the assessee has not completely followed section 32(2) for computing its income whereas the income from profit and gains of the business or profession should be computed as per section 29 of the Act and in accordance with the provisions of section 30

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)

section 115 JB of the Act by using “Unit Of Production Method” instead of allowing depreciation on producing facility at 5.28% on straight line method. 9. The taxpayer carried the matter by way of filing objections before the ld. DRP who has disposed of the same by confirming the proposal made by the ld. TPO. 10. In compliance

KAVITA AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI

ITA 5858/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2021AY 2011-12
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 112Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32

Depreciation Allowance u/s 32 and Investment Allowance u/s 32A. 11.9 Now let’s deliberate upon the second part of Rule 5(a) which prescribes for an adjustment on account of “provision for any tax, dividend, reserve or any other provision as may be prescribed which is not admissible under the provisions of sections 30

M/S THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 4535/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2021AY 2010-11
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 112Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32

Depreciation Allowance u/s 32 and Investment Allowance u/s 32A. 11.9 Now let’s deliberate upon the second part of Rule 5(a) which prescribes for an adjustment on account of “provision for any tax, dividend, reserve or any other provision as may be prescribed which is not admissible under the provisions of sections 30

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

30. The combined effect, therefore, of section 394(2) of the Companies Act, 1956, section 2(1A) and various other provisions of the Income-tax Act, is that despite amalgamation, the business, enterprise and undertaking of the transferor or amalgamating company - which ceases to exist, after amalgamation, is treated as a continuing one, and any benefits, by way of carry

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 615/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

30,717 pertaining to units other than those claiming deduction under section 1OA of the Act despite the fact that the said business loss is mentioned in the computation of income in the assessment order. 17. The Ld. AO has erred in not allowing deduction under section 80G of the Act amounting to Rs. 104,000 as per the return

EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 302/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

30,717 pertaining to units other than those claiming deduction under section 1OA of the Act despite the fact that the said business loss is mentioned in the computation of income in the assessment order. 17. The Ld. AO has erred in not allowing deduction under section 80G of the Act amounting to Rs. 104,000 as per the return

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HERO HONDA MOTORS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6302/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 80I

30,53,826/- under section 80IA of the Act in respect of the power generated at the aforesaid unit and captively consumed by the assessee. The deduction claimed was duly supported by Chartered Accountant’s Report. It was submitted that for the purposes of computing deduction under section 80IA, the assessee adopted transfer price of power, captively consumed

M/S. HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6282/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 80I

30,53,826/- under section 80IA of the Act in respect of the power generated at the aforesaid unit and captively consumed by the assessee. The deduction claimed was duly supported by Chartered Accountant’s Report. It was submitted that for the purposes of computing deduction under section 80IA, the assessee adopted transfer price of power, captively consumed

PRASIDH FINCAP LTD. ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-20(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1534/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarprasidh Fincap Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 2Nd Floor, Rsn Arcade, 6 Circle-20(1), Lsc, Near Peince New Delhi Apartment, Ip Extension, Parparganj, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacp6704D

For Appellant: Shri I. P. Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

depreciation is to his advantage. Income under the head "profits and gains of business or profession" is chargeable to income-tax under section 28 and income under section 29 is to be computed in accordance with the provisions contained in sections 30

PRASIDH FINCAP LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-20(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7965/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarprasidh Fincap Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 2Nd Floor, Rsn Arcade, 6 Circle-20(1), Lsc, Near Peince New Delhi Apartment, Ip Extension, Parparganj, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacp6704D

For Appellant: Shri I. P. Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

depreciation is to his advantage. Income under the head "profits and gains of business or profession" is chargeable to income-tax under section 28 and income under section 29 is to be computed in accordance with the provisions contained in sections 30

PRASIDH FINCAP LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-20(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7966/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarprasidh Fincap Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 2Nd Floor, Rsn Arcade, 6 Circle-20(1), Lsc, Near Peince New Delhi Apartment, Ip Extension, Parparganj, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaacp6704D

For Appellant: Shri I. P. Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

depreciation is to his advantage. Income under the head "profits and gains of business or profession" is chargeable to income-tax under section 28 and income under section 29 is to be computed in accordance with the provisions contained in sections 30

KARAN RAGHAV EXPORT P LTD

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/955/2010HC Delhi01 Nov 2010

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

Section 10

section 30 to 43D. The depreciation is covered by section 32 and therefore, it is to be considered if the depreciation

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. FORTUNE SOCIETY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2

ITA 2698/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiadit(E), Vs. Fortune Society For Tc-Ii, New Delhi Development & Promotion Of International Business, G-4, Community Centre, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi Pan:Aaatf0849L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anshu Prakash, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Satish Khosla, Adv
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12Section 143Section 2

Section 2(45) of the Act and that the word "income" is a wider term than the expression "profits and gains of business or profession". Reference was made to the nature of depreciation and it was pointed out that depreciation was nothing but decrease in the value of property through wear, deterioration or obsolescence. It was observed that depreciation

DDIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. ATUL MEHTA, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2669/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Yadav, Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr. D. R
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 57

section 56(2)(iii), then both streams of incomes shall be in nature of income from other sources and depreciation shall be available to the assessee even on income component pertaining to house property. The appellant has declared income pertaining to lease rental agreement as income from house property and claimed 30

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SB PACKAGING LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5318/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. L.P.Sahudcit Sb Packaging Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Vardhaman Plaza Circle-7(1) New Delhi Corner Inder Enclave, Paschim Vihar Vs. New Delhi Pan : Aabcs3731Q Pan : (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. The Ld. Assessing officer observed that the assessee company has claimed depreciation of Rs. 1,39,55,650/- and which has been allowed @ 30

RURAL COMMUNICATION AND MARKETING PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1338/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra, Ac C O U N Ta N T Member

30 on such commercial vehicles. These vehicles are the main source of income for the assessee and undergo lot of wear and tear while on roads in rural areas. In fact, due to hard rural conditions, these vehicles undergo more than usual depreciation." 2.1 The reply of the assessee was duly considered but not found tenable, as the assessee company