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 results for “depreciation”+ Section 13clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,351Delhi3,998Bangalore1,606Chennai1,418Kolkata909Ahmedabad894Hyderabad444Jaipur339Pune295Chandigarh228Karnataka223Cochin190Indore173Raipur172Surat171Amritsar123Cuttack117Visakhapatnam109Rajkot82Lucknow73SC72Nagpur65Jodhpur61Ranchi59Telangana51Guwahati37Panaji25Agra25Dehradun20Allahabad20Kerala19Patna16Calcutta13Jabalpur8Varanasi7Rajasthan6Punjab & Haryana4Orissa4Gauhati2MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Tripura1

Key Topics

Section 260A2

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BRAHMAPUTRA CRACKER AND POLYMER LIMITED....b

ITA/16/2022HC Gauhati11 Apr 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

Section 260A

13. In the case of The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Bajaj Herbals Pvt. Ltd., reported in 2022 0 Supreme (SC)307, the High Court dismissed the appeal simply observing that none of the questions proposed by the Revenue could be termed as involving substantial questions of Page No.# 8/14 law and that all the proposed questions were

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR. vs. M/S GREENPLY INDUSTRIES LIMITED

ITA/6/2023HC Gauhati03 Mar 2025

Bench: Honourable The Chief Justice Honourable Mr. Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 Date Of Judgment & Order : 04.03.2025

For Respondent: B SARMA, DR. ASHOK SARAF,MR P BARUAH,MR. N N
Section 115
Section 143(3)
Section 260A

13 SCC 358; had an occasion to again consider its earlier decision in the case of Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd.(supra) and Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (supra); and had concluded, as under: “17. What is important from the ratio of this judgment in Ponini Sugars case is the fact that Sahney Steer was followed and the test laid down