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.

10 results for “depreciation”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,283 Delhi1,867 Chennai996 Bangalore837 Kolkata418 Ahmedabad310 Jaipur209 Pune156 Karnataka148 Hyderabad146 Raipur120 Chandigarh99 Lucknow68 Visakhapatnam50 Indore47 Cochin46 Surat35 SC35 Amritsar27 Telangana25 Jodhpur22 Rajkot18 Nagpur17 Cuttack12 Ranchi10 Calcutta10 Guwahati10 Kerala6 Patna6 Varanasi5 Rajasthan5 Orissa3 Panaji3 Dehradun2 Gauhati2 Agra1 Jabalpur1 Punjab & Haryana1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Allahabad1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 25010 Section 143(1)10 Section 80I9 Section 808 Addition to Income7 Depreciation6 Disallowance6 Section 44A5 Section 143(3)5 Section 139(9)

DEEPA JHUNJHUNWALA,SHILLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 126/GTY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) and thereafter aggrieved the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds:

Section 139(4)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80Section 80ASection 80I

exemption provision which cannot be compared with claiming an additional depreciation under section 32(1) (ii-a) of the Act. As per the settled

4

DEEPA JHUNJHUNWALA,SHILLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 127/GTY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) and thereafter aggrieved the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds:

Section 139(4)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80Section 80ASection 80I

exemption provision which cannot be compared with claiming an additional depreciation under section 32(1) (ii-a) of the Act. As per the settled

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 38/GTY/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

depreciation amounting to Rs. 3,23,72,494/- Deduction amounting to Rs. 78,01,892/- Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 3,05,471/- 7. Being aggrieved, both the assessee and the revenue are now in appeal before the Tribunal. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the detailed written submission and placed reliance on judgment’s mentioned therein and also stated

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 43/GTY/2022[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

depreciation amounting to Rs. 3,23,72,494/- Deduction amounting to Rs. 78,01,892/- Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 3,05,471/- 7. Being aggrieved, both the assessee and the revenue are now in appeal before the Tribunal. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the detailed written submission and placed reliance on judgment’s mentioned therein and also stated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 2/GTY/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

depreciation amounting to Rs. 3,23,72,494/- Deduction amounting to Rs. 78,01,892/- Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 3,05,471/- 7. Being aggrieved, both the assessee and the revenue are now in appeal before the Tribunal. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the detailed written submission and placed reliance on judgment’s mentioned therein and also stated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 39/GTY/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

depreciation amounting to Rs. 3,23,72,494/- Deduction amounting to Rs. 78,01,892/- Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 3,05,471/- 7. Being aggrieved, both the assessee and the revenue are now in appeal before the Tribunal. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the detailed written submission and placed reliance on judgment’s mentioned therein and also stated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 37/GTY/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

depreciation amounting to Rs. 3,23,72,494/- Deduction amounting to Rs. 78,01,892/- Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 3,05,471/- 7. Being aggrieved, both the assessee and the revenue are now in appeal before the Tribunal. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the detailed written submission and placed reliance on judgment’s mentioned therein and also stated

PLASCOM INDUSTRIES LLP,KOLKATA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GUWAHATI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 280/GTY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sanjay Jha, JCIT

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 801ESection 801E(3)Section 801E(4)Section 801E(5)Section 801E(6)Section 80I

exemption u/s 801E on the following grounds. - Vide 1 para page 9 of the assessment order the only ground for disallowance was that the assessee failed to prove that it fulfilled the conditions laid down u/s 80IE (3) 801E (4) and 801E (5) of the Income tax Act 1961. The assessee disputed the action of the Ld. AO before

MONJIL ALI BARBHUIYA,SILCHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SILCHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 28/GTY/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Monjil Ali Barbhuiya Ito, Ward-2, Silchar Mazumder Barzar, Tarapur, Vs. Silchar, Cachar-788003. Pan: Anzpb 6357 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri N.T. Sherpa, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 28.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 08.08.2019 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals, Shillong [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’]. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “I. For That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Assessment Is Bad In Law & Facts As Your Humble Appellant Could Not Get The Opportunities For Unavoidable Reasons To Rebut The Materials Gathered Against The Assessee & Also Considering Other Facts & Circumstances.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.T. Sherpa, JCIT

Section 131Section 143(2)

depreciation in his return of income and further the ld. AO make an addition of Rs. 43,00,000/- in the hands of assessee which was credited in the bank account of the assessee for which no proper explanation was given by him during the framing of assessment by the AO. The ld. AO while framing the assessment he stated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. GREENPLY INDUSTRIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 140/GTY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati15 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrimanomohan Das, Jm Greenply Industries Ltd Acit, Circle-1 Madgul Lounge, 5 Th Floor, 23 Aaykar Bhawan, Milan Nagar, Chetiacental Road, Kolkata- Vs. Dibrugarh-786001, Assam 700027, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacg7284R Assessee By : Shri Ashok Tulsyan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Jha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Tulsyan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jha, DR

exemption is purely capital receipt and is neither chargeable to tax under the normal provisions of the Income Tax Act nor is to be included as part of the book profit for computing the minimum alternative tax as per the provisions of section 115JB of the Act. Thus Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is allowed." 32. Dr. Saraf