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.

321 results for “depreciation”+ Section 5clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,671Delhi5,046Chennai2,049Bangalore1,890Kolkata1,262Ahmedabad745Hyderabad459Pune381Jaipur371Karnataka321Chandigarh234Raipur205Surat196Cochin172Indore164Amritsar139Visakhapatnam118Cuttack106Lucknow98SC96Rajkot96Telangana75Nagpur67Jodhpur65Ranchi46Guwahati42Patna40Panaji33Calcutta32Dehradun32Kerala31Allahabad22Agra22Punjab & Haryana13Jabalpur12Orissa9Varanasi9Rajasthan6Gauhati2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1S. B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1Tripura1Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 260163Section 260A87Depreciation62Section 14830Deduction26Section 115J25Section 80H24Addition to Income21Disallowance21Section 11

WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/20040/2019HC Karnataka25 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit Writ Petition No.20040/2019 (T-It) Between:

Section 1Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 254Section 92C

section 244A(1A) would apply to cases covered u/s 153(5); thus where, in respect of certain issues, order giving effect to be passed u/s 153(5), otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment is passed beyond the prescribed 42 time-limit, interest u/s 244A(1A) has to be granted in respect of refund arising on such issues

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

Showing 1–20 of 321 · Page 1 of 17

...
18
Section 26318
Section 10A16
STRP/412/2015
HC Karnataka
19 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

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

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

Section 260

Section 35(2)(iv) of 19 the 1965 Act. It was the case of the assessee claiming a specified percentage of the written down value of the asset as depreciation besides claiming deduction in 5

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

Section 260

Section 35(2)(iv) of 19 the 1965 Act. It was the case of the assessee claiming a specified percentage of the written down value of the asset as depreciation besides claiming deduction in 5

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

Section 260

Section 35(2)(iv) of 19 the 1965 Act. It was the case of the assessee claiming a specified percentage of the written down value of the asset as depreciation besides claiming deduction in 5

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI ADICHUNCHUNGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/233/2013HC Karnataka22 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Section 260

Section 35(2)(iv) of 19 the 1965 Act. It was the case of the assessee claiming a specified percentage of the written down value of the asset as depreciation besides claiming deduction in 5

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SRI ADICHUNCHANAGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/1/2013HC Karnataka22 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Section 260

Section 35(2)(iv) of 19 the 1965 Act. It was the case of the assessee claiming a specified percentage of the written down value of the asset as depreciation besides claiming deduction in 5

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

Section 260

Section 35(2)(iv) of 19 the 1965 Act. It was the case of the assessee claiming a specified percentage of the written down value of the asset as depreciation besides claiming deduction in 5

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

Section 260

Section 35(2)(iv) of 19 the 1965 Act. It was the case of the assessee claiming a specified percentage of the written down value of the asset as depreciation besides claiming deduction in 5

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 under Section 11 of the Act as claimed by the assessee. 5 9. In all these appeals, the common

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

5 - Aggrieved by the said orders, the respondent-Trust preferred appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mysore (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Appellate Authority’ for short) in ITA No.267/Trust/CIT(A) V/10-11 and ITA No.838/Trust/CIT(A) V/11-12, contending that under Section 11(1) of the Act, depreciation

M/S PADMINI PRODUCTS (P) LTD., vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the aforesaid

ITA/154/2014HC Karnataka05 Oct 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 260ASection 32(1)Section 43(1)

Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act cannot be allowed. It was further held that depreciation is only allowable as per proviso (5

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)

section 11 of the Act and depreciation being a notional expenditure is not allowable?” 3. This Court in case of ‘Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona’ [2018] 89 taxmann.com 127 [SC] with regard to allowability and Depreciation in the hands of Religious and Charitable Trust held as under: “5

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI N LEELA KUMAR

ITA/384/2007HC Karnataka25 Nov 2013

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 158Section 260A

depreciation under sub-section (2) of section 32 shall not be set off against the undisclosed income determined in the block assessment under this Chapter, but may be carried forward for being set off in the regular assessments. 7. This chapter was introduced for the assessment of undisclosed income determined as a result of carrying out search under Section

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

5. Learned Counsel at the Bar submitted that so far as the issue regarding claim of Depreciation under Section 32 of the Act is concerned

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

5. Learned Counsel at the Bar submitted that so far as the issue regarding claim of Depreciation under Section 32 of the Act is concerned

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

5.—For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that the provisions of this sub- section shall apply whether or not the assessee has claimed the deduction in respect of depreciation

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SUBEX LTD

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

ITA/684/2015HC Karnataka01 Oct 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 143Section 2Section 260Section 260ASection 263Section 35D

5 - 6. As per Regulation 2[g] of Foreign Exchange Management [Transfer or Issue of any Foreign Security] Regulations, 2004, “Foreign Currency Convertible Bond [FCCB]” means a bond issued by an Indian company expressed in foreign currency, and the principal and interest in respect of which is payable in foreign currency. 7. Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds as per Regulation