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 251(1)(a)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai469Delhi397Bangalore162Ahmedabad109Kolkata100Jaipur87Chennai85Hyderabad68Pune38Chandigarh36Cochin35Indore27Nagpur23Surat23Lucknow20Raipur15Rajkot12Guwahati11Amritsar10Visakhapatnam8Kerala7Cuttack7Karnataka5Telangana4Panaji3Agra3SC2Jabalpur2Allahabad2Patna2Jodhpur2Ranchi2Varanasi1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 40A(3)3Depreciation2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHHINDWARA vs. M/S. CENTRAL MADHYA PRADESH GRAMIN BANK, CHHINDWARA

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 135/JAB/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur10 Dec 2020AY 2012-13
Section 147Section 43Section 43(1)

251(1)(a) 4 | P a g e Asst. CIT v. Central Madhya Pradesh Gramin Bank stands amended by Finance Act, 2001, excluding the power of set aside with the first appellate authority w.e.f. 01/6/2001. The impugned order does not, even as contended by the Revenue per its’ Ground, address the issue as to if a nexus was required

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), JABALPUR vs. ANAND MINING CORPORATION, JABALPUR

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 104/JAB/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur
24 Nov 2023
AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)

251/-. Since there is no difference in the royalty paid as per books of accounts and royalty payment appearing in form no 26AS, hence the addition of Rs. 1 lakh made by the AO is deleted. In result, this ground of appeal is allowed.” 6. The learned D.R. submitted that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition and relied