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.

163 results for “depreciation”+ Section 2(14)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,806Delhi2,542Bangalore1,078Chennai807Ahmedabad668Kolkata584Pune333Hyderabad324Jaipur320Chandigarh238Karnataka163Raipur159Indore134Cochin131Visakhapatnam124Surat121Amritsar113Cuttack100Rajkot64Lucknow59SC54Nagpur44Guwahati39Ranchi34Telangana31Jodhpur30Agra18Kerala15Panaji13Calcutta11Allahabad11Dehradun10Patna10Varanasi7Rajasthan5Orissa3Jabalpur2Punjab & Haryana1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 260149Section 260A74Depreciation46Section 14839Deduction34Exemption31Section 3230Charitable Trust30Section 1126Section 115J

M/S UDAYA SOUHARDA CREDIT CO OP SOCIETY LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, Writ appeals stand dismissed

ITA/330/2019HC Karnataka20 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

Section 143(3)Section 260Section 4

depreciation in the following year and deeming it to be part of that allowance ; the effect of deeming it to be part of that allowance is that it falls in the following year within Clause (vi) and has to be deducted as allowance.”” 14. In the case of State of Maharashtra V/s. Laljit Rajshi Shah and Others [(2000) 2

M/S SWABHIMANI SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE LTD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (ITO) WARD-5(2)(3

In the result, Writ appeals stand dismissed

ITA/833/2018HC Karnataka

Showing 1–20 of 163 · Page 1 of 9

...
26
Carry Forward of Losses21
Set Off of Losses19
20 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

Section 143(3)Section 260Section 4

depreciation in the following year and deeming it to be part of that allowance ; the effect of deeming it to be part of that allowance is that it falls in the following year within Clause (vi) and has to be deducted as allowance.”” 14. In the case of State of Maharashtra V/s. Laljit Rajshi Shah and Others [(2000) 2

M/S SRI VARUN SOUHARDA CREDIT CO OP LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, Writ appeals stand dismissed

ITA/295/2019HC Karnataka20 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

Section 143(3)Section 260Section 4

depreciation in the following year and deeming it to be part of that allowance ; the effect of deeming it to be part of that allowance is that it falls in the following year within Clause (vi) and has to be deducted as allowance.”” 14. In the case of State of Maharashtra V/s. Laljit Rajshi Shah and Others [(2000) 2

M/S SWABHIMANI SOUHARDA CREDIT CO OPERATIVE LTD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (ITO) WARD-5(2)(3)

In the result, Writ appeals stand dismissed

ITA/832/2018HC Karnataka20 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

Section 143(3)Section 260Section 4

depreciation in the following year and deeming it to be part of that allowance ; the effect of deeming it to be part of that allowance is that it falls in the following year within Clause (vi) and has to be deducted as allowance.”” 14. In the case of State of Maharashtra V/s. Laljit Rajshi Shah and Others [(2000) 2

M/S UDAYA SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, Writ appeals stand dismissed

ITA/869/2018HC Karnataka20 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

Section 143(3)Section 260Section 4

depreciation in the following year and deeming it to be part of that allowance ; the effect of deeming it to be part of that allowance is that it falls in the following year within Clause (vi) and has to be deducted as allowance.”” 14. In the case of State of Maharashtra V/s. Laljit Rajshi Shah and Others [(2000) 2

M/S. MARMON FOOD AND BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITA/725/2017HC Karnataka09 Apr 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 260A

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80-IA. (7A) Where any undertaking

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S.GE INDIA TECHNOLOGY

ITA/12/2014HC Karnataka09 Apr 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 260A

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80-IA. (7A) Where any undertaking

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S.GE INDIA TECHNOLOGY

ITA/11/2014HC Karnataka09 Apr 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 260A

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80-IA. (7A) Where any undertaking

M/S. MARMON FOOD AND BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITA/728/2017HC Karnataka09 Apr 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 260A

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80-IA. (7A) Where any undertaking

M/S. MARMON FOOD AND BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITA/726/2017HC Karnataka09 Apr 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 260A

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80-IA. (7A) Where any undertaking

M/S. MARMON FOOD AND BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITA/206/2018HC Karnataka09 Apr 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 260A

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80-IA. (7A) Where any undertaking

M/S. MARMON FOOD AND BEVERAGE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITA/727/2017HC Karnataka09 Apr 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 260A

depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (7) The provisions of sub-section (8) and sub-section (10) of section 80IA shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the undertaking referred to in this section as they apply for the purposes of the undertaking referred to in section 80-IA. (7A) Where any undertaking

AZIM PREMJI TRUSTEE COMPANY PVT LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:-

WP/15910/2022HC Karnataka28 Oct 2022

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 56(2)

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year). Explanation.—For the purposes of assessment or reassessment or recomputation under this section, the Assessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment

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

14 (XL-35) dated 11.4.1955 states to the effect that it is the duty of the assessing officer to make available to the assessee any legitimate and legal tax relief to which the assessee is entitled, but has omitted to claim for one reason or another. Merely because the assessee in the return filed under Section

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

14 (XL-35) dated 11.4.1955 states to the effect that it is the duty of the assessing officer to make available to the assessee any legitimate and legal tax relief to which the assessee is entitled, but has omitted to claim for one reason or another. Merely because the assessee in the return filed under Section

M/S FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/512/2017HC Karnataka23 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 2(22)(e)Section 254Section 260

14. Mr. Percy Pardiwala, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant- Assessee Company vehemently submitted before us that the Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction and vide para 7 of the Order Date of Judgment :23-07-2018 I.T.A.No.512/2017 M/s. Fidelity Business Services India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, & Anr. 13/86 quoted above, it has unnecessarily

M/S J K CEMENT WORKS vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

STRP/100001/2014HC Karnataka23 Mar 2017

Bench: H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 63Section 65Section 65(1)

iii) That considering section 11(a)(2) of the Act and entry 3 of the Fifth Schedule to the Act, all electrical and electronic goods including air- conditioners, air coolers, telephones, fax machines, etc., used would fall in the category of the goods for which the input-tax credit would be inadmissible unless the goods are for resale

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. PRAVEEN V DODDANAVAR

ITA/100003/2014HC Karnataka20 Feb 2017

Bench: SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 63Section 65Section 65(1)

iii) That considering section 11(a)(2) of the Act and entry 3 of the Fifth Schedule to the Act, all electrical and electronic goods including air- conditioners, air coolers, telephones, fax machines, etc., used would fall in the category of the goods for which the input-tax credit would be inadmissible unless the goods are for resale

THE BAILHONGAL URBAN COOPERATIVE BANK LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/100001/2014HC Karnataka16 Dec 2015

Bench: S.ABDUL NAZEER,P.S.DINESH KUMAR

Section 63Section 65Section 65(1)

iii) That considering section 11(a)(2) of the Act and entry 3 of the Fifth Schedule to the Act, all electrical and electronic goods including air- conditioners, air coolers, telephones, fax machines, etc., used would fall in the category of the goods for which the input-tax credit would be inadmissible unless the goods are for resale

HEWLETT PACKARD FINANCIAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

STRP/412/2015HC Karnataka19 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

Section 23(1)Section 39(1)Section 5(2)Section 65(1)

depreciation not being claimed by the appellant on the leased equipments. Per contra, the appellant has submitted that it is an integrated transaction and not two independent transactions to fasten the tax liability and as the integrated transaction is in 13 the course of import falls under the purview of Section 5(2) of the CST Act and has given