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.

62 results for “depreciation”+ Unexplained Cash Creditclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai430Delhi315Jaipur115Ahmedabad110Chennai105Bangalore87Kolkata80Hyderabad62Chandigarh51Indore39Pune39Visakhapatnam31Cochin28Guwahati28Raipur27Nagpur23Amritsar21Lucknow20Rajkot18Surat18Agra11Cuttack11Jodhpur9Allahabad7Varanasi6Patna5SC4Ranchi3Panaji3Karnataka3Jabalpur2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Telangana1Kerala1

Key Topics

Addition to Income55Section 143(3)47Section 6842Section 37(1)40Section 234A30Section 153A25Search & Seizure24Section 13222Section 4021

RAJENDER REDDY GUNNA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 1849/HYD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Aug 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

unexplained cash credit of Rs.42,41,280/- towards additions made on account of undisclosed income from land transactions on the basis of ‘Lokpriya’ notebook found during the course of survey. Accordingly, ground no.6 of the assessee is allowed. 56. The next issue that came-up for consideration from ground no.7 of assessee’s appeal is, addition towards donation from undisclosed

ITO., WARD-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. PHOENIX INFRAVENTURES AND PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

Showing 1–20 of 62 · Page 1 of 4

Section 14818
Disallowance18
Depreciation17

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 867/HYD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2022-23 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Phoenix Infraventures & Projects Private Limited, Ward – 16(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan No.Aafcp5499L. (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri R. Mohan Kumar, Advocate Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 68

depreciation. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the current liability in terms of sundry creditors was increased to Rs.82,40,35,474/- when compared to previous year sundry creditors balance of Rs.37,646/-. Therefore, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to file relevant evidence and also to justify the increase in sundry creditors

SKR CONSTRUCTIONS,,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RG-9,, HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1819/HYD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 253(2)Section 40A(3)Section 68

Unexplained cash credits, 3. Disallowance u/s 40A(3), 4. disallowance on account of miss match of 26AS, 5. Disallowance on account of Sub contract payments and 6. Disallowance of expenditure made on adhoc basis. Inspite of the above, the assessee requested the Commissioner of Appeal-VI to dispose the case by adopting the 8% on net turnover after allowing admissible

ASST.CIT, CIRCLE-9(1),, HYDERABAD vs. M/S S.K.R.CONSTRUCTIONS,, SURYAPET

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

ITA 1878/HYD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 253(2)Section 40A(3)Section 68

Unexplained cash credits, 3. Disallowance u/s 40A(3), 4. disallowance on account of miss match of 26AS, 5. Disallowance on account of Sub contract payments and 6. Disallowance of expenditure made on adhoc basis. Inspite of the above, the assessee requested the Commissioner of Appeal-VI to dispose the case by adopting the 8% on net turnover after allowing admissible

KANISHKA GUPTA,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are dismissed

ITA 119/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Narahari BiswalFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 115BSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 68Section 69B

unexplained credit taxed in the hands of the firm, in their respective hands. The appellants and the firm are different entitites and therefore needs to be taxed separately in their own hands especially when the nature is different and it is important to note that when the incriminating documents of Rs.70,00,000/ - pertaining to both the appellants were found

RONAK GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are dismissed

ITA 120/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Narahari BiswalFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 115BSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 68Section 69B

unexplained credit taxed in the hands of the firm, in their respective hands. The appellants and the firm are different entitites and therefore needs to be taxed separately in their own hands especially when the nature is different and it is important to note that when the incriminating documents of Rs.70,00,000/ - pertaining to both the appellants were found

SUPREME AGRO,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are dismissed

ITA 121/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Narahari BiswalFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 115BSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 68Section 69B

unexplained credit taxed in the hands of the firm, in their respective hands. The appellants and the firm are different entitites and therefore needs to be taxed separately in their own hands especially when the nature is different and it is important to note that when the incriminating documents of Rs.70,00,000/ - pertaining to both the appellants were found

GONUGUNTLA NIRMALA DEVI,ANANTAPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 455/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 68

depreciation on Plant & Machinery claimed by the appellant. 8. That the Ld.CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.32,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer treating cash deposits in the bank account as unexplained cash credits

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 622/HYD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 621/HYD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 617/HYD/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 619/HYD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 618/HYD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 957/HYD/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 620/HYD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

M/S MIDWEST GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 616/HYD/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 958/HYD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 962/HYD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 959/HYD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 961/HYD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250(6)Section 37(1)

depreciation. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Ground No.(iii): Sustaining 50% of the addition amounting to Rs. 37,29,714/- (50% of Rs. 74,59,428) made towards inflated expenditure on Granite processing and dressing charges U/s. 37(1) of the Act. 20. During the course of assessment proceedings subsequent to search it was observed by the Ld. AO that