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.

8 results for “depreciation”+ Section 190clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai328Delhi260Bangalore98Ahmedabad92Chennai71Kolkata53Hyderabad41Jaipur41Raipur35Lucknow28Cochin20Chandigarh18Indore16Pune15Visakhapatnam13Guwahati12Karnataka8Ranchi6Allahabad5Rajkot4SC4Cuttack2Jodhpur2Surat2Agra1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Orissa1Amritsar1Telangana1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 26020Section 115J9Section 36(1)(vii)5Depreciation4Section 43D3Section 353Deduction3Section 36(2)(i)2Section 14A2Section 35D

COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE

ITA/312/2016HC Karnataka17 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 12ASection 260

Section 11 of the Income-tax Act meant “applied or finally set apart” for the benefit of the trust and that the allocation as made in the assessee’s books was enough to show that the relevant amount was finally set apart or applied for charitable purposes. We are unable to agree. It is not in dispute that there

M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

WP/7004/2014HC Karnataka24 Apr 2015

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

2
Section 143(3)
Section 144C(1)
Section 144C(13)
Section 35
Section 35(1)(i)

190 Hemalatha Gargya vs. CIT (7) (2013) 40 taxman.com 545 Vodafone India Ltd., vs. Union of India (8) (1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC) Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd., vs. Income Tax Officer (9) (2003) 264 ITR 566 (SC) Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Foramer France (10) (2007) 001 CLR 0067 (SC) Union of India and Another vs. Kunisetty Satyanarayana

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. SYNDICATE BANK

The appeals are disposed of

ITA/98/2010HC Karnataka23 Jan 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 115JSection 14ASection 260Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(i)Section 43D

depreciation on securities (iv) floating rate notes of London branch (v) DICGC loans (vi) suits filed accounts (vii) miscellaneous provision cannot be added back in accordance with Explanation to Section 115JA of the Act in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in H.C.L. Comnet where is diminution in the value of assets as contended by the assessee

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. SYNDICATE BANK

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA/587/2013HC Karnataka07 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 115JSection 260Section 35DSection 36(1)(vii)

depreciation on valuation of investment portfolio is allowable by treating the investments held by the assessee bank as stock-in-trade 4 once the RBI Master Circular read with CBDT Circular No.665 came into force”? 4. “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that expenditure incurred by assessee towards issue

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SYNDICATE BANK

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA/351/2014HC Karnataka07 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 145Section 260Section 36(1)(vii)Section 43D

depreciation on 8 valuation of investment portfolio in computing Book Profit u/s. 115JB by treating the investments held by the assessee bank as stock-in-trade once the RBI Master Circular read with CBDT Circular NO.665 came into force?” 6(b) “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in allowing

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/211/2009HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

Section 145A of the Income- tax Act which was inserted with effect from assessment year 1999-2000. The said provision states that the valuation of stock should include the amount of any tax duty, cess or fee - 94 - actually paid or incurred to bring the goods to its present location and condition. The Department has followed a consistent stand

M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/881/2008HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

Section 145A of the Income- tax Act which was inserted with effect from assessment year 1999-2000. The said provision states that the valuation of stock should include the amount of any tax duty, cess or fee - 94 - actually paid or incurred to bring the goods to its present location and condition. The Department has followed a consistent stand

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. SYNDICATE BANK

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA/585/2013HC Karnataka07 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 115JSection 260Section 36(1)(vii)

depreciation on valuation of investment portfolio is allowable by treating the investments held by the assessee bank as stock-in-trade once the RBI Master Circular read with CBDT Circular No.665 came into force”?. 5. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in accepting assessee’s claim that the assessee