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.

14 results for “depreciation”+ Section 194Hclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai90Delhi71Chennai32Bangalore29Hyderabad14Ahmedabad13Kolkata12Karnataka8Indore6Pune4Surat3Allahabad3Chandigarh3Jaipur3Raipur2Rajkot2Patna1

Key Topics

Section 194H19Section 4019Section 14A14Disallowance14Depreciation10Addition to Income10TDS9Section 143(1)8Section 143(3)8Section 143(2)

HIL LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 555/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

depreciation 13,57,000 4. The first issue in appeal for the A.Y.2009-10 is the disallowance of sales incentive to stockists on the ground that the assessee had not deducted the tax at source as required u/s.194H of the Act. The AO treated discounts given to stockists as commission and applied the provisions of Section

5
Section 1953
Section 194J3

M/S HIL LIMITED(FORMERLY KNOWN AS HYDERABAD INDUSTRIES LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-2, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1702/HYD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

depreciation 13,57,000 4. The first issue in appeal for the A.Y.2009-10 is the disallowance of sales incentive to stockists on the ground that the assessee had not deducted the tax at source as required u/s.194H of the Act. The AO treated discounts given to stockists as commission and applied the provisions of Section

M/S HIL LIMITED(FORMERLY KNOWN AS HYDERABAD INDUSTRIES LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-2, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1703/HYD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

depreciation 13,57,000 4. The first issue in appeal for the A.Y.2009-10 is the disallowance of sales incentive to stockists on the ground that the assessee had not deducted the tax at source as required u/s.194H of the Act. The AO treated discounts given to stockists as commission and applied the provisions of Section

M/S HIL LIMITED(FORMERLY KNOWN AS HYDERABAD INDUSTRIES LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-2, , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1701/HYD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

depreciation 13,57,000 4. The first issue in appeal for the A.Y.2009-10 is the disallowance of sales incentive to stockists on the ground that the assessee had not deducted the tax at source as required u/s.194H of the Act. The AO treated discounts given to stockists as commission and applied the provisions of Section

HIL LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 647/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

depreciation 13,57,000 4. The first issue in appeal for the A.Y.2009-10 is the disallowance of sales incentive to stockists on the ground that the assessee had not deducted the tax at source as required u/s.194H of the Act. The AO treated discounts given to stockists as commission and applied the provisions of Section

DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, HYDERABAD vs. M/S ANJANI PORTLAND CEMENT LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1305/HYD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Ms. Geetindar Mann
Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)

depreciation treating it as capital expenditure, the payment is made for the purpose of business and assessee legally elgibile to claim it as expenditure in the current AY under consideration. The next question is whether CIT(A) is empowered to allow the claim of the assessee without remitting it back to AO. We notice that in the plethora of cases

ANJANI PORTLAND CEMENT LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1493/HYD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Ms. Geetindar Mann
Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)

depreciation treating it as capital expenditure, the payment is made for the purpose of business and assessee legally elgibile to claim it as expenditure in the current AY under consideration. The next question is whether CIT(A) is empowered to allow the claim of the assessee without remitting it back to AO. We notice that in the plethora of cases

SUNIL VISHRAM CHAWDA, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. CIT (OSD), RANGE-10, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are allowed

ITA 1432/HYD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.A. SaiprasadFor Respondent: Shri B. Suresh Babu
Section 194H

194H would come into play only when the particular expenses fell under the head "commission" and its nexus with the business of the assessee was proved beyond doubt. He rejected the logic of the assessee as irrelevant, i.e. the payments were through cheques and the TDS was made and therefore, the expenditure should be treated as genuine. According

SUNIL VISHRAM CHAWDA, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are allowed

ITA 1430/HYD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.A. SaiprasadFor Respondent: Shri B. Suresh Babu
Section 194H

194H would come into play only when the particular expenses fell under the head "commission" and its nexus with the business of the assessee was proved beyond doubt. He rejected the logic of the assessee as irrelevant, i.e. the payments were through cheques and the TDS was made and therefore, the expenditure should be treated as genuine. According

SUNIL VISHRAM CHAWDA, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are allowed

ITA 1431/HYD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.A. SaiprasadFor Respondent: Shri B. Suresh Babu
Section 194H

194H would come into play only when the particular expenses fell under the head "commission" and its nexus with the business of the assessee was proved beyond doubt. He rejected the logic of the assessee as irrelevant, i.e. the payments were through cheques and the TDS was made and therefore, the expenditure should be treated as genuine. According

SUNIL VISHRAM CHAWDA, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-14(1), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are allowed

ITA 1433/HYD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.A. SaiprasadFor Respondent: Shri B. Suresh Babu
Section 194H

194H would come into play only when the particular expenses fell under the head "commission" and its nexus with the business of the assessee was proved beyond doubt. He rejected the logic of the assessee as irrelevant, i.e. the payments were through cheques and the TDS was made and therefore, the expenditure should be treated as genuine. According

NUNHEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,R.R.DIST vs. JCIT, RANGE 16, HYDERABAD

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the A

ITA 327/HYD/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Jul 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 195Section 40Section 43B

194H and 194J of the IT Act, and since the assessee failed to deduct tax from these payments, he held that such expenditure is not allowable u/s 40(a)(ia). 3.3 Further, the A.O also observed that the assessee has made a provision of Rs.51,91,186/- towards scheme discount i.e the additional discount to the customers who participated

NUNHEMS INDIA PVT.LTD.,,R.R.DIST vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-16, HYDERABAD

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the A

ITA 290/HYD/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 195Section 40Section 43B

194H and 194J of the IT Act, and since the assessee failed to deduct tax from these payments, he held that such expenditure is not allowable u/s 40(a)(ia). 3.3 Further, the A.O also observed that the assessee has made a provision of Rs.51,91,186/- towards scheme discount i.e the additional discount to the customers who participated

NUNHEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. ASST.CIT,CIRCLE 16(1),,

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the A

ITA 1775/HYD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 195Section 40Section 43B

194H and 194J of the IT Act, and since the assessee failed to deduct tax from these payments, he held that such expenditure is not allowable u/s 40(a)(ia). 3.3 Further, the A.O also observed that the assessee has made a provision of Rs.51,91,186/- towards scheme discount i.e the additional discount to the customers who participated