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.

547 results for “depreciation”+ Section 3(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,748Delhi5,109Chennai2,019Bangalore1,871Ahmedabad1,301Kolkata1,266Pune751Hyderabad599Jaipur547Chandigarh395Karnataka343Cochin285Surat240Visakhapatnam230Indore224Raipur223Cuttack196Amritsar170Rajkot116Lucknow105SC100Nagpur85Telangana84Jodhpur80Ranchi77Guwahati70Calcutta45Patna42Agra39Kerala36Panaji35Dehradun33Allahabad23Jabalpur17Punjab & Haryana16Orissa10Varanasi9Rajasthan6Gauhati2S. B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Tripura1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Addition to Income73Section 143(3)67Disallowance40Depreciation35Section 14733Section 14829Section 8029Section 80I23Deduction23Section 154

LAL CHAND MEENA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7-3, JAIPUR

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

ITA 515/JPR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jun 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 148Section 45(3)Section 50CSection 69C

section 45. The effect of this amendment is that profits and gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset by a partner to a firm shall be chargeable as the partner’s income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. For purposes of computing the capital gains, the value of the asset recorded in the books

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

Showing 1–20 of 547 · Page 1 of 28

...
19
Exemption17
Section 25016
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 under section 32 of the IT Act, 1961 is not admissible in respect of the assets on which exemption has been allowed u/s 11 of the IT Act, 1961 while applying the income for charitable purpose. Further ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same.” 3. The brief

GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1066/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Nov 2018AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)(b)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)

Section 13(3) of the Act. Since the assessee has not charged any interest on the said advance given to the specified persons, therefore, the Assessing Officer has made the addition of the reasonable interest to be charged. 8. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. Though, the advance

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. JADAU JEWELLERS & MFG (P) LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 502/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal and Shri Gulshan Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl.CIT - DR
Section 142Section 144Section 153A

Section 40(a)(ia) provides for certain disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are generally allowed under the general section. The computation u/s.29 has to be made u/s.145 on the basis of books of account regularly maintained by the assessee which the Assessing Officer did by estimating the profit at 5% of the sales. The learned Counsel

SUBHASH PARETA,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the revenue are disposed off with above directions

ITA 434/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.L.Chandel (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 142Section 40A(3)Section 69Section 69C

3) the assessment is required to be in the manner under Section 144 of the Act only. However, it is well known that in the case of Best Judgment where resort is taken to Section 144, the Assessing Officer exercising his jurisdiction cannot act arbitrarily or capriciously. The assessment must proceed on judicial considerations in the light of relevant

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA vs. M/S SHIV VEGPRO PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 739/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jul 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereinafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year) : Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section

SYLVAN GREENS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 414/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Bhala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 801C

3) of the Act, nor during any enquiry by the assessee. Hence the assessment proceedings initiated under section 147/148 of the Act are not according to the law and facts of the case is liable to be quashed. 2.8 We further noted that the grievance of the assessee was that ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming

M/S. KAIZEN ORGANICS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 834/JPR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: The Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.K. Mahala (JCIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

depreciation on Plant and Machinery of Rs. 8,04,524/-. The action of the ld. CIT (A) is illegal, unjustified 2 M/s. Kaizen Organics Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the said disallowance of Rs. 8,04,524/-. 3. The appellant craves its rights to add, amend

ACIT, KOTA vs. MANGALAM CEMENT LTD., KOTA

ITA 82/JPR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jan 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri H.V. Gurjar (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(i)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 43B

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act during the course of original assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act. Now, examining

SAROJ DEVI HALDIYA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-6(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 917/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.B. Natani, CAFor Respondent: Mrs.Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(ix)Section 57

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the\n assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to\nas the relevant assessment year) :\nProvided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section

SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR GUPTA,BHARATPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHARATPUR

In the result, the appeals for the assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and for the assessment year 2012-13 is allowed

ITA 947/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Or During The Course Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (ACIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(3)

depreciation and IA. A separate audit report in the prescribed form 10CCB in support of the claim for deduction under Section 80IA/80IB was also duly submitted. The assessee had also submitted reply pursuant to all queries made by AO during the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act. In this

SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR GUPTA,BHARATPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHARATPUR

In the result, the appeals for the assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and for the assessment year 2012-13 is allowed

ITA 946/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Or During The Course Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (ACIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(3)

depreciation and IA. A separate audit report in the prescribed form 10CCB in support of the claim for deduction under Section 80IA/80IB was also duly submitted. The assessee had also submitted reply pursuant to all queries made by AO during the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act. In this

M/S RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 25/JPR/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jul 2019AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri PC Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

section 143(3) was completed on 14.06.2007 by making various additions to the tune of Rs. 121,85,97,423/- though the total income was assessed at NIL after setting off of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BEAWAR vs. SHRI MAN MOHAN MITTAL, BEAWAR

In the result, the cross objection so raised by the assessee is rejected

ITA 764/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Vinod Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 40A(3)

Section 145(3) of the Act. In this regard our reference was drawn to the 8 ITA No. 764/JP/2018 & CO No. 24/JP/2018 ITO vs. Shri Man Mohan Mittal various findings of the Assessing Officer in the assessment order as under:- “Finding of the AO (a) Thus, considering the entire facts of the case it is relevant from the records

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

ITA 962/JPR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2015-2016
For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereinafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year)." (Emphasis supplied) What is clear from the above provision is that once assessment is reopened for bringing to tax any income that escaped assessment in terms

COMPUCOM SOFTWARE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-VI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 256/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jun 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act during the course of original assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act. Now, examining

M/S. VAIBHAV GLOBAL (GEMS) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals for the A

ITA 1348/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Shri K.C. Gupta (JCIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149

section 142(1) dated 17.08.2010 is reproduced as under :- Ministry of Finance OFFICE OF THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2), JAIPUR [dated: - 17.08.2010 PAN-AAACZ 2642 3 M/s Zari Silk (India) P. Ltd., 10-11, Narain Singh Circle, Jaipur. Sir, Sub: - Assessment proceeding for the A.Y. 2008-09-reg. As you are aware that your case is under

M/S. VAIBHAV GLOBAL (GEMS) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals for the A

ITA 1346/JPR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2020AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Shri K.C. Gupta (JCIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149

section 142(1) dated 17.08.2010 is reproduced as under :- Ministry of Finance OFFICE OF THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2), JAIPUR [dated: - 17.08.2010 PAN-AAACZ 2642 3 M/s Zari Silk (India) P. Ltd., 10-11, Narain Singh Circle, Jaipur. Sir, Sub: - Assessment proceeding for the A.Y. 2008-09-reg. As you are aware that your case is under

M/S. VAIBHAV GLOBAL (GEMS) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals for the A

ITA 1347/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2020AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Shri K.C. Gupta (JCIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149

section 142(1) dated 17.08.2010 is reproduced as under :- Ministry of Finance OFFICE OF THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2), JAIPUR [dated: - 17.08.2010 PAN-AAACZ 2642 3 M/s Zari Silk (India) P. Ltd., 10-11, Narain Singh Circle, Jaipur. Sir, Sub: - Assessment proceeding for the A.Y. 2008-09-reg. As you are aware that your case is under

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI VIMAL CHAND SURANA(HUF), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 62/JPR/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (CA) &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 139Section 143Section 147Section 150(2)Section 153CSection 2Section 250Section 69

3) of section 143 a presumption can be raised that such an order has been passed on application of mind. It is well known that a presumption can also be raised to the effect that in terms of clause (e) of section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act judicial and official acts have been regularly performed