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 43(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,165Delhi1,971Bangalore879Chennai659Ahmedabad613Kolkata414Hyderabad259Jaipur232Pune227Chandigarh207Raipur147Indore110Visakhapatnam101Karnataka93Surat84Amritsar81Cochin77Cuttack74Rajkot49SC45Lucknow45Ranchi44Guwahati40Nagpur34Jodhpur29Telangana21Agra17Dehradun16Patna12Kerala12Allahabad11Panaji9Varanasi6Calcutta4Orissa2Jabalpur2D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 80I6Section 1474Section 44A3Depreciation2Addition 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)

43(1), it was incumbent on him to either do that himself or, in the alternative, seek a remand report from the AO in the matter, so as to settle the matter one way or the other, i.e., on the anvil and on the basis of definite finding/s which in his view is decisive of the matter. How could

M/S BINDRA WAREHOUSING CORPORATION vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1),

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 153/JAB/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Bleassessment Year : 2008-09 Bindra Warehousing Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-1(1), Corporation, Itarsi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 80Section 80I

depreciation and imposing the tax on the same which is neither correct nor justified therefore same is liable to be deleted. However, prior to arguing the same, the ld. Counsel for the assessee, Shri Mishra, would plead for admission of legal Grounds (Gds. 3 & 4), reading as under, also praying for their adjudication first inasmuch as the acceptance thereof, where