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.

498 results for “depreciation”+ Section 2(22)(e)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,786 Delhi2,179 Bangalore1,117 Chennai929 Kolkata498 Ahmedabad400 Jaipur179 Hyderabad177 Raipur139 Chandigarh114 Indore104 Pune101 Karnataka72 Surat68 Visakhapatnam60 Cuttack59 Lucknow56 Cochin52 SC46 Rajkot39 Nagpur32 Guwahati31 Ranchi28 Telangana23 Amritsar23 Jodhpur15 Agra15 Kerala13 Allahabad11 Dehradun7 Panaji6 Varanasi6 Calcutta5 Patna4 Jabalpur2 Rajasthan2 D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)99 Addition to Income56 Section 80I54 Section 14A47 Disallowance41 Section 115J38 Deduction38 Section 25037 Section 14835 Depreciation

ACIT, CIRCLE - 15(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1084/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2012-13

depreciation disallowance. This first substantive grievance is rejected. 6. Next comes section 2(22)(e) deemed dividend addition of ₹1,22

INDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-1(1), (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 934/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpalyadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Showing 1–20 of 498 · Page 1 of 25

...

35

Section 12A

Section 2(15)

Section 25

22. Facts in brief are that the assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs. 16,20,365/- in AY 2013-14 and Rs. 18,43,085/- in AY 2014-15 as application of income. The AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the deduction of the said depreciation as an expense to be deducted from the gross receipts

INDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-1(1), (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 933/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpalyadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

22. Facts in brief are that the assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs. 16,20,365/- in AY 2013-14 and Rs. 18,43,085/- in AY 2014-15 as application of income. The AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the deduction of the said depreciation as an expense to be deducted from the gross receipts

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1123/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

22. Facts in brief are that the assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs. 16,20,365/- in AY 2013-14 and Rs. 18,43,085/- in AY 2014-15 as application of income. The AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the deduction of the said depreciation as an expense to be deducted from the gross receipts

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(3), EXEMPTION , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 499/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

22. Facts in brief are that the assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs. 16,20,365/- in AY 2013-14 and Rs. 18,43,085/- in AY 2014-15 as application of income. The AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the deduction of the said depreciation as an expense to be deducted from the gross receipts

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 906/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

22. Facts in brief are that the assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs. 16,20,365/- in AY 2013-14 and Rs. 18,43,085/- in AY 2014-15 as application of income. The AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the deduction of the said depreciation as an expense to be deducted from the gross receipts

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD- 1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1228/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

22. Facts in brief are that the assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs. 16,20,365/- in AY 2013-14 and Rs. 18,43,085/- in AY 2014-15 as application of income. The AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the deduction of the said depreciation as an expense to be deducted from the gross receipts

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIA FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3),EXEMPT, KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1230/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

22. Facts in brief are that the assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs. 16,20,365/- in AY 2013-14 and Rs. 18,43,085/- in AY 2014-15 as application of income. The AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the deduction of the said depreciation as an expense to be deducted from the gross receipts

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1229/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

22. Facts in brief are that the assessee has claimed depreciation of Rs. 16,20,365/- in AY 2013-14 and Rs. 18,43,085/- in AY 2014-15 as application of income. The AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the deduction of the said depreciation as an expense to be deducted from the gross receipts

MANAV KUMAR SARAF,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-37, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 340/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-

Section 143(1)Section 2(22)(e)Section 24b

depreciation disallowance Rs.76,401/- on motor car, disallowance of motor car maintenance Rs.38,800/- made by AO”. 4. As regards the issue raised in Ground No. 1 relating to the addition of Rs.5,10,590/- made on account of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e

XL ENTERPRISES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2105/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 133(6)Section 2(22)(e)

22)(e). Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Navnitlal C. Jhaveri (supra) has very clearly held as under : "For the purpose of calculating profits within the meaning of the phrase 'accumulated profits' under section 2(6A)(e), an allowance for depreciation

MEGA ENGINEERS & BUILDERS,PORT BLAIR vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(2) , PORT BLAIR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 312/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

22 I.T.A. No.312/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mega Engineers & Builders 11. This legal dichotomy emerging from the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 115JB particularly having regard to the first proviso contained therein in case of a banking company, would convince us that machinery provision provided in sub-section (2) of section l15JB of the Act, would be rendered

ACIT, LTU - 2, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. UCO BANK, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 585/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. M/S Uco Bank Acit, Ltu-2, Kolkata 10, Btm, Sarani, Kolkata – 700001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacu3561B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shankar, CITFor Respondent: Shri D. S. Damle, FCA

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 211Section 40

depreciation which have been adopted for preparing such accounts including profit and loss account for such financial year or part of such financial year falling within the relevant previous year. " 7.2 Section 211(1), 211(2), 211(3), 211(3A), 211(3B) and 211(3C) of Companies Act 1956: 211. FORM AND CONTENTS OF BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT AND LOSS

ACIT, LTU - 2, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. UCO BANK, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 584/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 201Section 40

e) the Registration of Transferred Companies Ordinance, 1942 (54 of 1942); and (f) any law corresponding to any of the Act or the Ordinance aforesaid and in force in the merged territories or in a Part B State, or any part thereof, before the extension thereto of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 (7 of 1913)". 7.3.6. As demonstrated in earlier

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD., KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 377/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

2), as increased by— (a) -------- (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) if any amount referred to in clauses (a) to (f) is debited to the profit and loss account, and as reduced by— 71[(i) ---- (ii) 72[(iii) the amount of loss brought forward or unabsorbed depreciation, whichever is less as per books of account. Explanation.—For the purposes of this

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA vs. HUTCHISON TELECOM EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 343/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

2), as increased by— (a) -------- (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) if any amount referred to in clauses (a) to (f) is debited to the profit and loss account, and as reduced by— 71[(i) ---- (ii) 72[(iii) the amount of loss brought forward or unabsorbed depreciation, whichever is less as per books of account. Explanation.—For the purposes of this

M/S VODAFONE EAST LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 431/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

2), as increased by— (a) -------- (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) if any amount referred to in clauses (a) to (f) is debited to the profit and loss account, and as reduced by— 71[(i) ---- (ii) 72[(iii) the amount of loss brought forward or unabsorbed depreciation, whichever is less as per books of account. Explanation.—For the purposes of this

DCIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 482/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

2), as increased by— (a) -------- (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) if any amount referred to in clauses (a) to (f) is debited to the profit and loss account, and as reduced by— 71[(i) ---- (ii) 72[(iii) the amount of loss brought forward or unabsorbed depreciation, whichever is less as per books of account. Explanation.—For the purposes of this

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 485/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

2), as increased by— (a) -------- (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) if any amount referred to in clauses (a) to (f) is debited to the profit and loss account, and as reduced by— 71[(i) ---- (ii) 72[(iii) the amount of loss brought forward or unabsorbed depreciation, whichever is less as per books of account. Explanation.—For the purposes of this

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 673/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

2), as increased by— (a) -------- (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) if any amount referred to in clauses (a) to (f) is debited to the profit and loss account, and as reduced by— 71[(i) ---- (ii) 72[(iii) the amount of loss brought forward or unabsorbed depreciation, whichever is less as per books of account. Explanation.—For the purposes of this