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.

56 results for “depreciation”+ Deemed Dividendclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai897Delhi488Chennai257Bangalore230Kolkata202Ahmedabad174Chandigarh77Pune57Jaipur56Raipur45Hyderabad40Cochin23Lucknow21Cuttack18Guwahati17Indore17Karnataka17Visakhapatnam16Surat16SC14Nagpur10Telangana8Agra5Panaji3Rajkot3Calcutta2Jodhpur2Amritsar1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)55Section 80I38Disallowance34Addition to Income33Section 14731Section 1130Section 115J26Section 8023Deduction20Section 148

VINOD KUMAR MITTAL,BEAWAR vs. ITO, AJMER

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

ITA 783/JPR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Feb 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra GargieyaFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl. CIT - DR
Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

Deemed dividend under s. 2(22)(e)—Accumulated profits—Loan from S Ltd., a company in which assessee is holding substantial interest and voting power—Amount outstanding in the name of assessee in the books of S Ltd., under the head 'loans and advances’ had to be treated as advance/loan to shareholder as envisaged under

SHRI GOVIND SWAROOP GARG,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1-2, AJMER

In the result, ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 614/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 56 · Page 1 of 3

19
Section 14A18
Depreciation17
ITAT Jaipur
02 Apr 2019
AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri K C Meena (Add.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

deemed dividend in. assessee's hands and worked out the same at Rs 17,82,120/- as against the reserves and surplus shown in the balance sheet of the company as on 31.03.2010 at Rs. 28,35,265/-. This is also proves to be totally wrong and unacceptable. Section 2(22)(e) is unambiguous and states “……..payment by any such

DEEPAK VEGPRO (P) LTD.,ALWAR vs. ACIT, ALWAR

ITA 110/JPR/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Apr 2017AY 2009-10
Section 2(22)(e)

deemed dividend and learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Alwar has erred in sustaining the same by not giving any finding thereto. 1.6 That the learned assessing officer has erred in law as well as on the facts and circumstances of the case in considering the accumulated profit of Rupees 81,27,348.00 as on 03.01.2009, whereas the assessee company

KATH BROTHERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 77/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 69

dividend 2.2 ITO v/s Chitalia Builders 90 CCH 405(Guj) it has been held that Insofar as the deletion of addition is concerned, we find that the A.O was not confronted 28 Kath Brothers vs. ACIT with any defects in the books of accounts maintained by the assessee. The A.O has not given any valid reasons for not accepting

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 268/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Suhani Meharwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

depreciation eligible for application should be recomputed after verification as per law by the assessing officer as the same was not verified by the assessing officer while making the original assessment. 7. In respect of ground number 3, the same were allowed to be carried forward earlier as Business losses in the appeal order (earlier 11-12 order) referred

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 275/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Suhani Meharwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

depreciation eligible for application should be recomputed after verification as per law by the assessing officer as the same was not verified by the assessing officer while making the original assessment. 7. In respect of ground number 3, the same were allowed to be carried forward earlier as Business losses in the appeal order (earlier 11-12 order) referred

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 270/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Suhani Meharwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

depreciation eligible for application should be recomputed after verification as per law by the assessing officer as the same was not verified by the assessing officer while making the original assessment. 7. In respect of ground number 3, the same were allowed to be carried forward earlier as Business losses in the appeal order (earlier 11-12 order) referred

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 269/JPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Suhani Meharwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

depreciation eligible for application should be recomputed after verification as per law by the assessing officer as the same was not verified by the assessing officer while making the original assessment. 7. In respect of ground number 3, the same were allowed to be carried forward earlier as Business losses in the appeal order (earlier 11-12 order) referred

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 271/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Suhani Meharwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

depreciation eligible for application should be recomputed after verification as per law by the assessing officer as the same was not verified by the assessing officer while making the original assessment. 7. In respect of ground number 3, the same were allowed to be carried forward earlier as Business losses in the appeal order (earlier 11-12 order) referred

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 500/JPR/2023[215-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits u/s 115JA. Exemption/ deduction allowed by one provision of the Act cannot be taken away by another provision of the Act. Sec. 115JA, the predecessor to Sec. 115JB, was introduced to the statute book and the budget speech of the finance minister while introducing the Bill

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 496/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits u/s 115JA. Exemption/ deduction allowed by one provision of the Act cannot be taken away by another provision of the Act. Sec. 115JA, the predecessor to Sec. 115JB, was introduced to the statute book and the budget speech of the finance minister while introducing the Bill

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

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

ITA 152/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 250Section 32(1)(ii)Section 80Section 80I

depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits under s. 115JA. Exemption/deduction allowed by one provision of the Act cannot be taken away by another provision of the Act. Sec. 115JA, the predecessor to s. 115JB, was introduced to the statute book and the Budget Speech of the Finance Minister while introducing the Bill, House

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

ITA 490/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits u/s 115JA. Exemption/ deduction allowed by one provision of the Act cannot be taken away by another provision of the Act. Sec. 115JA, the predecessor to Sec. 115JB, was introduced to the statute book and the budget speech of the finance minister while introducing the Bill

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

ITA 489/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits u/s 115JA. Exemption/ deduction allowed by one provision of the Act cannot be taken away by another provision of the Act. Sec. 115JA, the predecessor to Sec. 115JB, was introduced to the statute book and the budget speech of the finance minister while introducing the Bill

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, AJMER, AJMER

ITA 497/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

depreciable asset is liable to be excluded from calculation of deemed profits u/s 115JA. Exemption/ deduction allowed by one provision of the Act cannot be taken away by another provision of the Act. Sec. 115JA, the predecessor to Sec. 115JB, was introduced to the statute book and the budget speech of the finance minister while introducing the Bill

M/S. MAHARAJA SHREE UMAID MILLS LTD. JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 784/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri P.C.Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (JCIT)
Section 10Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 40

dividend income claimed as exempt by the assessee. The Therefore, disallowance on account of administrative expenses under Rule 8D(iii) is hereby restricted to the extent of exempt income so claimed by the assessee. In the result, the ground of appeal is partly allowed. 10. In ground no. 2, the assessee has challenged the disallowance of depreciation of Rs.46

GOLCHA MINERALS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 1137/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri A.B. Dangyach (CA)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)

deemed necessary or convenient for any business which the Company is authorized to carry on. 7. to lease, let out on hire, mortgage, pledge, sell or otherwise dispose of the whole or any part of the undertaking of the company or any lands, business, property, rights or assets of any kind of the company or any share or interest therein

ACIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. MAHIMA SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR

In the result, all the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed and ground taken by the assessee society is allowed

ITA 105/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Mar 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar (CIT)
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 32

depreciation or otherwise in respect of any asset, acquisition of which has been claimed as an application of income under this section in the same or any other previous year. (7) Where a trust or an institution has been granted registration under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 12AA or has obtained registration at any time under section

CASTAMET WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,KHARWA vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR

ITA 187/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh. Prakul Khurana (Adv.) &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(va)

dividend income of the Appellant earned from investment in equities and Mutual Therefore, as per working submitted by Appellant during assessment proceedings, these were not considered for the purpose of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act as these expenditure are incurred purely for business purpose and not for making investments. 81. Accordingly, being satisfied with the basis of computation

RAMESHWARAM STRONG GLASS (P.) LTD.,AJMER vs. ITO, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 884/JPR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Jul 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena, JCIT- DR
Section 143(2)

deems fit to apply. In the instant case, the assessee company has exercised its option to value its shares as per DCF method and we find that the objection of the AO is primarily directed at not adopting the book value of determination of value of shares as against DCF adopted 14 M/s. Rameshwaram Strong Glass