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.

206 results for “depreciation”+ Section 391clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai263Delhi206Chennai74Bangalore71Ahmedabad57Kolkata30Hyderabad30Jaipur18Pune16Cochin13Visakhapatnam7Karnataka6Raipur5Indore5SC5Lucknow5Allahabad3Guwahati3Agra2Chandigarh2Nagpur1Rajkot1Jabalpur1Telangana1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)78Section 14A77Addition to Income69Section 14767Disallowance49Section 14840Section 10A38Deduction34Depreciation33Section 115J

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)

391(2) and 394 read with sections 100 to 103 of the Companies Act, 1956 and section 52 of the Companies Act, 1956 with the appointed date of 1st April, 2016 (effective date 11.04.2017) vide approval dated March 23, 2017 accorded by National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). 5 3. The taxpayer is engaged in the business of surveying, prospecting, drilling

Showing 1–20 of 206 · Page 1 of 11

...
23
Section 6820
Section 1120

S.C., JOHNSON PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ADDI. CIT SPECIAL RANGE-8, NEW DELHI

ITA 1122/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2008-09
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80I

depreciation on goodwill under normal provisions of the Act, while computing profits\nunder section 115JB of the Act. The summary of the findings of the Ld. AO while making the addition to the book profits of the assessee and brief comments of the Assessee on factual and legal mistakes committed by the Ld. AO while making such disallowance

INDUS TOWERS LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT CIRCLE 12(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1962/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarindus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Acit, Vs. Indus Towers Ltd, 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, Central Circle-10, New Delhi Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Indus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Rohit Jain, Adv Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv Ms. Shaurya Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 12/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 148

depreciation only on written down value of assets being transferred from PSCL to Ponni Sugars (Erode) Ltd. Hon‟ble High Court held that the order sanctioning scheme of arrangement by the company Court pursuant to Section 391

ACIT , CIRCLE 10, NEW DELHI vs. INDUS TOWER LIMITED, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2212/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarindus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Acit, Vs. Indus Towers Ltd, 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, Central Circle-10, New Delhi Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Indus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Rohit Jain, Adv Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv Ms. Shaurya Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 12/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 148

depreciation only on written down value of assets being transferred from PSCL to Ponni Sugars (Erode) Ltd. Hon‟ble High Court held that the order sanctioning scheme of arrangement by the company Court pursuant to Section 391

INDUS TOWERS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BHARTI INFRATEL LTD AND AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST OF ERSTWHILE INDUS TOWER LTD) ,GURUGRAM, HARYANA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 12(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2762/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarindus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Acit, Vs. Indus Towers Ltd, 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, Central Circle-10, New Delhi Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Indus Towers Ltd (Formerly Vs. Dcit, Known As Bharti Infratel Ltd), Circle-12(1), 4Th Floor, Dlf Cybercity, New Delhi Building No. 10, Tower A, Dlf Qe, So Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcv0274F Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Rohit Jain, Adv Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv Ms. Shaurya Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 12/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 148

depreciation only on written down value of assets being transferred from PSCL to Ponni Sugars (Erode) Ltd. Hon‟ble High Court held that the order sanctioning scheme of arrangement by the company Court pursuant to Section 391

INDUS TOWERS LTD.,GURUGRAM, HARYANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 12(1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2607/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2025AY 2011-12
Section 142Section 143(3)

depreciation only on written down value of\nassets being transferred from PSCL to Ponni Sugars (Erode) Ltd. Hon'ble\nHigh Court held that the order sanctioning scheme of arrangement by the\ncompany Court pursuant to Section 391

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SALORA INTERNATIONAL LTD.

ITA/12/2003HC Delhi13 May 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

For Appellant: Mr Ashok K. Manchanda, Senior StandingFor Respondent: Mr Salil Kapoor, Mr Sanat Kapoor, Ms Ananya
Section 260ASection 391Section 50

depreciable asset only". The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Mugneeram Bangur & Co. (Land Department): (1965) 57 ITR 299 (SC) and held that Section 50(1) of the ITA 12/2003 Page 11 of 28 Act was inapplicable. The Tribunal also noticed the provisions of Section 50B of the Act - which were introduced

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 10(1), DELHI, CR BUILDING vs. INDUS TOWERS LIMITED, GURGRAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2805/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2025AY 2011-12
Section 142Section 143(3)

depreciation only on written down value of\nassets being transferred from PSCL to Ponni Sugars (Erode) Ltd. Hon'ble\nHigh Court held that the order sanctioning scheme of arrangement by the\ncompany Court pursuant to Section 391

M/S. ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 90/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143Section 92C

391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. The said scheme of Merger was also in accordance with the provisions of Section 2(1 B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) and the shareholders of FSSL and FSL were issued shares in the assessee (earlier known as KIL), pursuant to the said merger. 27 48. The scheme of arrangement

M/S. ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES (HOLDINGS) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2671/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143Section 92C

391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. The said scheme of Merger was also in accordance with the provisions of Section 2(1 B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) and the shareholders of FSSL and FSL were issued shares in the assessee (earlier known as KIL), pursuant to the said merger. 27 48. The scheme of arrangement

HEWITT ASSOCIATES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5736/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Atul Jain &For Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT-DR

391,931,625 Difference/ adjustment 22,11,60,596 5. The Ld. AO in his final assessment order dated 31.10.2011 enhanced the income of the assessee by making addition of Rs. 41,20,14,305/- proposed by the Ld. TPO. 6. The Hon’ble Dispute Resolution Panel (“DRP”) vide its order dated 20.9.2011 confirmed the transfer pricing adjustment

M/S. KEI INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, Ground No.3

ITA 528/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Satyan Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. D.R

section 10B of the Act, which is not permissible. Assessing Officer had only reduced returned loss by Rs.56,28,605/- being the loss of Chopanki Unit eligible for deduction u/s 10B after excluding depreciation on capitalization of exchange fluctuation. Hence, addition of Rs. 56,28.605/- in returned loss is deleted and loss of Chopanki Unit is not to be separately

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. K.E.I. INDUSTRIES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Ground No.3

ITA 1433/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Satyan Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. D.R

section 10B of the Act, which is not permissible. Assessing Officer had only reduced returned loss by Rs.56,28,605/- being the loss of Chopanki Unit eligible for deduction u/s 10B after excluding depreciation on capitalization of exchange fluctuation. Hence, addition of Rs. 56,28.605/- in returned loss is deleted and loss of Chopanki Unit is not to be separately

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 165/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11(6) of the IT Act, 1961 inserted

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, EXEMPTION RANGE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 6051/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11(6) of the IT Act, 1961 inserted

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 167/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11(6) of the IT Act, 1961 inserted

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 166/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11(6) of the IT Act, 1961 inserted

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 168/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11(6) of the IT Act, 1961 inserted

M/S. ABHISAR BUILDWELL PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 823/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anchal Khandelwal, Senior DR
Section 153ASection 32Section 43Section 44ASection 801CSection 80ISection 8I

depreciation of Rs.6,40,38,391/- in accordance with the provisions of section 44AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short

M/S. AT & T GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2538/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiat & T Global Network Services Dcit, (India) Pvt Ltd., Circle-2(1), Vs. Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon New Delhi Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, At & T Global Network Services Circle-2(1), (India) Pvt Ltd., Vs. New Delhi Vatika Lok-1, Block-A, Gurgaon Pan:Aafca8810L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, CAFor Respondent: Shri N C Swain CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32Section 36

depreciation on the amount of Rs. 77,76,975/- is concerned, the AO is directed to verify if the respective assets have been put to use during the year or not and proceed accordingly. However, if the claim is allowed, the AO shall clearly specify in the assessment order that the benefits so allowed is subject to the final decision