Search: depreciation | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

354 results for “depreciation”+ Depreciationclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai6,433 Delhi5,691 Chennai2,452 Bangalore2,070 Kolkata1,447 Ahmedabad779 Hyderabad491 Pune472 Jaipur366 Karnataka354 Chandigarh253 Raipur207 Cochin203 Surat180 Indore168 Amritsar139 Cuttack123 Visakhapatnam117 SC102 Lucknow101 Rajkot98 Telangana91 Nagpur76 Jodhpur69 Ranchi61 Guwahati48 Calcutta47 Patna42 Panaji39 Kerala39 Dehradun32 Agra28 Punjab & Haryana18 Jabalpur14 Allahabad11 Varanasi11 Orissa10 Rajasthan7 Gauhati2 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 S. B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1 Tripura1 Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 260163 Section 260A88 Depreciation64 Deduction27 Section 115J24 Section 80H24 Disallowance21 Addition to Income19 Section 26318 Section 10A

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. THE KARNATAKA STATE

ITA/106/2016HC Karnataka27 Sept 2018

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S.G.PANDIT

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260

depreciation, as per the provisions of Section 11 of the Act. Further, he held that claim of depreciation

M/S J K INDUSTRIES LTD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA/1105/2006HC Karnataka

Showing 1–20 of 354 · Page 1 of 18

...

17

19 Feb 2013

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260Section 80ASection 80H

depreciation allowance of any year. Whether such brought forward depreciation of earlier years is treated as depreciation

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CISCO SYSTEMS

The appeals are allowed; the impugned

ITA/27/2019HC Karnataka18 Jun 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 260ASection 263Section 32

depreciation claimed on assets under lease transactions, but disputed the rate of depreciation claimed by the assessee and therefore

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI SRI ADICHUNCHUNAGIRI SHIKSHANA TRUST

In the result, all the appeals are

ITA/384/2016HC Karnataka28 Jun 2016

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 10Section 10(23)Section 11Section 12ASection 144Section 260Section 263

depreciation on capital assets when it amounts to double deduction as the income of the assessee is already exempt

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION

ITA/306/2015HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 260Section 28Section 32Section 35(2)(iv)

depreciation as expenditure stating that the allowance of depreciation has nothing to do with the application of income

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SRI ADICHUNCHANAGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/1/2013HC Karnataka22 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation by the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/414/2010HC Karnataka22 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation by the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS vs. AL-AMEEN CHARITABLE FUND TRUST

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/62/2010HC Karnataka22 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation by the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA REDDY JANASANGHA

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/56/2013HC Karnataka22 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation by the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION (MEDICAL)

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/430/2013HC Karnataka22 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation by the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/431/2013HC Karnataka22 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation by the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI ADICHUNCHUNGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/233/2013HC Karnataka22 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

depreciation by the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

HERBALIFE INTERNATIONAL INDIA PVT LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the assessee's appeal for

ITA/433/2018HC Karnataka20 May 2025

Bench: V KAMESWAR RAO,S RACHAIAH

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 260Section 263

depreciation rates prescribed under Rule-5 of Income Tax Rules, 1962, the appellant claimed 100% depreciation on the aforesaid

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ACADEMY OF GENERAL EDUCATION

ITA/371/2014HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 268A

depreciation on the value of the building at the rate of 2.5 per cent and they also claimed depreciation

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MAA COMMUNICATION BOZELL LTD

The appeal is allowed

ITA/523/2006HC Karnataka04 Sept 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 260Section 260ASection 32Section 80M

depreciation is not to be allowed should have allowed the amount paid under hire purchase. In case depreciation

THE COMMISSIONER vs. JYOTHY CHARITABLE TRUST

ITA/707/2015HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 14Section 15Section 260Section 32

depreciation on the value of the building at the rate of 2.5 per cent and they also claimed depreciation

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION

ITA/317/2014HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 32Section 35

depreciation on the value of the building at the rate of 2.5 per cent and they also claimed depreciation

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE

ITA/239/2011HC Karnataka19 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 12ASection 260Section 263Section 32

depreciation on the value of the building at the rate of 2.5 per cent and they also claimed depreciation

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT (A) vs. M/S AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE

ITA/107/2017HC Karnataka19 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 12ASection 260Section 263Section 32

depreciation on the value of the building at the rate of 2.5 per cent and they also claimed depreciation

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BPL SANYO FINANCE LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is

ITA/652/2006HC Karnataka11 Sept 2013

Bench: The Tribunal Was Arising From The Order Dated 4Th June 2004 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Bangalore (For Short “The

Section 115JSection 133Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

depreciation claimed in respect of the alleged sale and lease back from M/s.Bellary Steel and alloys Limited (for short