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.

66 results for “depreciation”+ Section 50clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,698 Delhi2,362 Bangalore933 Chennai764 Kolkata534 Ahmedabad408 Jaipur214 Hyderabad205 Raipur138 Chandigarh134 Pune132 Cochin78 Indore77 Amritsar70 Karnataka66 Visakhapatnam55 Lucknow49 Surat43 SC42 Rajkot37 Ranchi35 Jodhpur26 Guwahati23 Telangana21 Nagpur21 Cuttack19 Calcutta10 Patna8 Kerala8 Panaji7 Allahabad7 Agra5 Dehradun4 Jabalpur2 Rajasthan1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Orissa1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 260106 Section 260A68 Section 14831 Depreciation19 Addition to Income14 Section 143(3)12 Section 26311 Section 5(1)8 Section 10B8 Section 143(2)

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S RITTAL INDIA PVT LTD.,

ITA/268/2014HC Karnataka24 Nov 2015

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

Section 260ASection 32Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

50% of additional 20% depreciation (i.e. 10% additional depreciation) under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act in the corresponding

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

Showing 1–20 of 66 · Page 1 of 4

7

Section 143(3)

Section 144

Section 260A

Section 263

Section 32

Section 32 (1) of the Act. Therefore, the assessee fulfills even the requirements for a claim of a higher rate of depreciation, and hence is entitled to the same. 31. In this regard, we endorse the following observations of the Tribunal, which clinch the issue in favour of the assessee. “15. The CBDT vide Circular No. 652, dated

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

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA/133/2007HC Karnataka23 Aug 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

depreciation can be allowed contrary to the judgment of the Apex Court reported in 49 ITR 160. A-2 Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the deduction of Rs.42,00,536/- u/s.80HH and the deduction of Rs.52,50,669/- u/s.80I of the Act is allowable despite the new industrial undertaking not meeting the conditions stipulated u/s 80HH

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SWETHA REALMART LLP

ITA/186/2023HC Karnataka05 Mar 2025

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT,RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

Section 260Section 50

depreciable asset, therefore, holding non-application of section 50 of the Act on the footing that depreciation was claimed by the assessee

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S AMCO POWER SYSTEMS LTD.,

ITA/767/2009HC Karnataka07 Oct 2015

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

50,00,000 iii. 16/03/2002 Rs. 5,00,000 iv. 31/03/2002 Rs. 40,00,000 v. 25/04/2002 Rs. 5,00,000 vi. 17/01/2003 Rs. 5,00,000 vii. 03/04/2004 Rs. 30,000 viii. 13/04/2004 Rs. 1,60,000 ix. 13/07/2004 Rs. 1,00,000 x. 27/07/2004 Rs. 2,00,000 xi. 06/09/2004 Rs. 3,00,000 xii. 10/12/2004

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S AMCO POWER SYSTEMS LTD.,

ITA/765/2009HC Karnataka07 Oct 2015

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

50,00,000 iii. 16/03/2002 Rs. 5,00,000 iv. 31/03/2002 Rs. 40,00,000 v. 25/04/2002 Rs. 5,00,000 vi. 17/01/2003 Rs. 5,00,000 vii. 03/04/2004 Rs. 30,000 viii. 13/04/2004 Rs. 1,60,000 ix. 13/07/2004 Rs. 1,00,000 x. 27/07/2004 Rs. 2,00,000 xi. 06/09/2004 Rs. 3,00,000 xii. 10/12/2004

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S AMCO POWER SYSTEMS LTD.,

ITA/769/2009HC Karnataka07 Oct 2015

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

50,00,000 iii. 16/03/2002 Rs. 5,00,000 iv. 31/03/2002 Rs. 40,00,000 v. 25/04/2002 Rs. 5,00,000 vi. 17/01/2003 Rs. 5,00,000 vii. 03/04/2004 Rs. 30,000 viii. 13/04/2004 Rs. 1,60,000 ix. 13/07/2004 Rs. 1,00,000 x. 27/07/2004 Rs. 2,00,000 xi. 06/09/2004 Rs. 3,00,000 xii. 10/12/2004

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S AMCO POWER SYSTEMS LTD

ITA/1046/2008HC Karnataka07 Oct 2015

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

50,00,000 iii. 16/03/2002 Rs. 5,00,000 iv. 31/03/2002 Rs. 40,00,000 v. 25/04/2002 Rs. 5,00,000 vi. 17/01/2003 Rs. 5,00,000 vii. 03/04/2004 Rs. 30,000 viii. 13/04/2004 Rs. 1,60,000 ix. 13/07/2004 Rs. 1,00,000 x. 27/07/2004 Rs. 2,00,000 xi. 06/09/2004 Rs. 3,00,000 xii. 10/12/2004

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S V S LAD and SONS

In the result, the second

ITA/100103/2014HC Karnataka27 Nov 2019

Bench: N.S.SANJAY GOWDA,ALOK ARADHE

Section 132Section 260ASection 32Section 37(1)Section 80GSection 80I

Section 80G and 80IB at Rs.1,37,50,000/- and Rs.36,18,515/- respectively, including the additional income declared during the course of search and post search proceedings. The Assessing Authority by an : 4 : order dated 30.12.2009 in respect of the assessment year 2008-09 completed the assessment by disallowing the depreciation

M/S T T K PRESTIGE LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/30388/2015HC Karnataka10 Aug 2018

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice S.Sujatha

Section 143Section 147Section 148

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year)." On going through the changes, quoted above, made to Section 147 of the Act, we find that, prior to Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, re-opening

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MAHABALESWARA ENTERPRISES

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA/941/2006HC Karnataka01 Apr 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,N.KUMAR

Section 260ASection 50

Section 50 is not attracted. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue is in appeals. 2. The assessee – firm sold its Hotel Pentagon and land appurtenant thereto under a sale deed dated 24.7.1995 for a sum of Rs.4 crore. In the said deed, the separate price for each of the asset like building, plant and machinery, furniture and fittings and land

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

ITA/12/2014HC Karnataka09 Apr 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

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

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

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

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

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/725/2017HC Karnataka09 Apr 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

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

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 STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH THE SECRETARY vs. M/S KARDICOPPAL ESTATE THITHIMATHI

Appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent

WA/3319/2004HC Karnataka22 Jun 2016

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 15Section 4

50 YEARS 3 COFFEE PLANTER MADIHALLI ESTATE BHARATHUR POST H. HOSAKOTE HOBLI ALUR TALUK. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI MANMOHAN P.N. ADV.) IN WA NO.3323/2004 BETWEEN: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE FINANCE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 1. 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE INCOME TAX 1ST CIRCLE, CHICKMAGALUR …APPELLANTS (BY SRI ADITYA SONDHI, ADDL

MANGALORE REFINERY AND PETROCHEMICALS LTD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:-

WP/10523/2022HC Karnataka18 Nov 2022

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

Depreciation 13,09,37,839 Disallowance under section 14A of the IT Act 9,03,79,391 7 8. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid assessment orders, the Petitioner filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which were partly allowed in favour of the petitioner vide orders dated 08.03.2013 and 24.09.2014 respectively, for the aforesaid assessment years