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 260Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi392Karnataka127Mumbai85Bangalore47Kolkata43Chennai38Calcutta35Amritsar33Telangana31Kerala18SC16Jaipur13Punjab & Haryana9Ahmedabad6Hyderabad5Lucknow4Orissa4Indore4Jabalpur2Gauhati2Nagpur2Cuttack2Visakhapatnam1Raipur1Rajasthan1Cochin1Surat1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Tripura1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 44A4Section 143(3)2Section 260A2Section 402Deduction2Depreciation2

M/S AMBIKA TRANSPORT CO. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 187/JAB/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 Feb 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 40Section 44A

260A of the Act, further requesting for the hearing to be therefore kept in abeyance till the same is adjudicated by it. The ld. Sr. DR, Shri Halder, would, on the other hand, rely on the orders by the Revenue authorities, whose stand, he would submit, has been upheld by the Tribunal, with there being in fact no ambiguity

M/S AMBIKA TRANSPORT CO. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 188/JAB/2013[2003-04]Status: Disposed
ITAT Jabalpur
16 Feb 2022
AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 40Section 44A

260A of the Act, further requesting for the hearing to be therefore kept in abeyance till the same is adjudicated by it. The ld. Sr. DR, Shri Halder, would, on the other hand, rely on the orders by the Revenue authorities, whose stand, he would submit, has been upheld by the Tribunal, with there being in fact no ambiguity