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.

11 results for “depreciation”+ Section 234Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai257Delhi237Bangalore150Ahmedabad57Kolkata32Chennai19Raipur17Surat15Chandigarh12Jaipur11Hyderabad8Cochin7Karnataka4Indore3Pune3Patna2Telangana1Amritsar1Dehradun1Jodhpur1Lucknow1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)16Section 145(3)8Depreciation8Addition to Income8Section 234A7Disallowance7Section 36(1)(iii)6Section 115Deduction5Section 12A

SCHOLAR'S EDUCATION TRUST OF INDIA,602-A, TRIMURTY DAVE APARTMENT, JAI SINGH HIGHWAY MARG, BANI PARK, JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

ITA 129/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: The Cit(A), The Power Exercised By Him U/S 263 For Disallowing The Donation Paid To Other Society Would Not Fall In The Ambit Of Section 263. 3. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Finding Given By Ld. Cit That Once Exemption U/S 11 Is Withdrawn, Not Disallowing The Scholar’S Education Trust Of India Vs. Cit(E)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Manoj Mehar (CIT) a
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 244A
4
Section 143(2)4
Section 142(1)4
Section 263

section 263. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the finding given by Ld. CIT that once exemption u/s 11 is withdrawn, not disallowing the Scholar’S Education Trust of India vs. CIT(E) donation of Rs. 1,83,60,000/- in computing the total income has made the assessment order passed by AO as erroneous & prejudicial

RAJIV GANDHI VIDHYA PITH SHIKSHA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION W(1), JAIPUR

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

ITA 234/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a
Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234B

section in the same or any other previous year.” 8 Rajiv Gandhi Vidhya Pith Shiksha vs. ITO The case of the AO was that the appellant having already claimed the capital expenditure in the preceding years/current year as application of income, the depreciation w.r.t. cost of such asset, if permitted, will amount to double deduction which was not permissible

SANTOSH KANWAR,JAIPUR vs. ITO 6(4 ) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 937/JPR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 274Section 288Section 68Section 69C

234D & 244A(3) if applicable as per rules. ITNS-150 issued, which is forming part of this order. Issue demand notice & challan accordingly. Penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is issued separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars.” 4 Santosh Kanwar, Jaipur. 4. Assessee-appellant, an individual, used to draw salary as director of Singla Buildcom Pvt. Ltd. She also

SHRI SUNDER LAL ADVANI,KOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTA

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

ITA 356/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Oct 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Saurav Harsh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, (JCIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 40aSection 44A

depreciation thereon. 6. That the ld. Assessing Officer also erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D and the learned CIT (Appeals), Kota also erred in confirming the same. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or amend any ground on or before the date of hearing. 2. The brief facts of the case are that

AKSH OPTIFIBRE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, ALWAR

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

ITA 170/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Akul Agarwal, C.A. (thr. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 234ASection 250

section 250 of the I.T. Act,\n1961, for the assessment year 2010-11.\n2.\nThe assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-\n\"1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. A.O. has erred in\nlaw as well as on facts in Issuing notice u/s 148 to an entity which

M/S HANUMAN TUBE WELL CO.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 556/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Oct 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, Addl. CIT
Section 145(3)Section 234DSection 44A

Section 145(3) is without any evidence/ material on record. 2 HANUMAN TUBEWELL COMPANY VS ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR 2. That the ld. Authorities below have grossly erred both in law and facts in applying NP Rate 8% subject to depreciation, remuneration and interest to partners as against NP rate of 7.5% shown by the assessee. Comparative Chart A.Y. Sales

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS AND FEBRICATIONS PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. ACIT CIR-1 KOTA , KOTA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 953/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, [ for short “Act”] by ACIT, Circle-01, Kota [ for short AO]. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - “1. The impugned order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 21.12.2018 is bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction and various other reasons

SHRI RAJENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,BARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BARAN

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

ITA 834/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Apr 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Hemang Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234B

Depreciation on Tanker 1,28,031/- 3.2 Tanker Insurance 62,821/- 3.3 Interest on TATA Finance 32,988/- Total 2,23,840/- The disallowance so made is contrary to the provisions of law and facts of the case. Hence, the same kindly be deleted in full. 4. The Id. CIT(A) further erred in law as well

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, KOTA

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

ITA 246/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 244ASection 36(1)(iii)

234D of the Act and as also in withdrawing interest u/s 244A of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging and withdrawal of any such interest. The interest so charged/withdrawn, being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in full. 2.1 The Ground No. 1 of the assessee is general in nature which

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, KOTA

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

ITA 620/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

234D of the Act and as also in withdrawing interest u/s 244A of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging and withdrawal of any such interest. The interest so charged/withdrawn, being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in full.’’ 2.1 During the course of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,KOTA vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the Grounds No

ITA 54/JPR/2017[2012-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2012-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 244ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

234D of the Act and as also in withdrawing interest u/s 244A of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging and withdrawal of any such interest. The interest so charged/withdrawn, being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in full. 3 ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE VS JCIT, RANGE-2, KOTA 2.1 The Ground No.1