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.

13 results for “depreciation”+ Section 270Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi142Mumbai102Chandigarh54Ahmedabad35Bangalore21Hyderabad19Pune15Kolkata13Chennai13Jaipur13Guwahati9Raipur6Surat5Lucknow5Indore4Nagpur4Rajkot2Visakhapatnam2Jodhpur2Amritsar1Cochin1Cuttack1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)15Section 144C(5)12Section 270A12Penalty9Section 92C7Section 2535Section 575Depreciation5Section 11(6)4Section 271A

PRIMETALS TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2017-18

ITA 371/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 371 & 372/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Primetals Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata 5Th Floor, Tower-C Vs Dlf, It Park-I 08 Majore Arterial Road New Town Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aaecv9657M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate & Pooja Saraf, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 1(1), Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Ao”) Even Dt. 29/04/2022, Passed In Pursuance Of The Directions Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, New Delhi, Dt. 18/02/2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18 & Dt. 04/03/2022 For Assessment Year 2018-19, Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Act. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18:- “Ground 1:

For Appellant: Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate and Pooja Saraf, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)
4
Disallowance4
Transfer Pricing3
Section 156
Section 32(1)
Section 92C

section 270A of the Act. Ground 18: That the appellant craves leave to add and / or to alter, amend, rescind, modify the grounds herein above or produce further documents before or at the time of hearing of this Appeal.” 3. In addition to the above grounds of appeal, the assessee has raised additional grounds of appeal for both the Assessment

PRIMETALS TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2017-18

ITA 372/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 371 & 372/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Primetals Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata 5Th Floor, Tower-C Vs Dlf, It Park-I 08 Majore Arterial Road New Town Kolkata - 700156 [Pan : Aaecv9657M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate & Pooja Saraf, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Orders Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C & 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 1(1), Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Ao”) Even Dt. 29/04/2022, Passed In Pursuance Of The Directions Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, New Delhi, Dt. 18/02/2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18 & Dt. 04/03/2022 For Assessment Year 2018-19, Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Act. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18:- “Ground 1:

For Appellant: Shri Ajoy Vora, Sr. Advocate and Pooja Saraf, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 156Section 32(1)Section 92C

section 270A of the Act. Ground 18: That the appellant craves leave to add and / or to alter, amend, rescind, modify the grounds herein above or produce further documents before or at the time of hearing of this Appeal.” 3. In addition to the above grounds of appeal, the assessee has raised additional grounds of appeal for both the Assessment

ST. PETER SCHOOL,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 820/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2018-19 St. Peters School Ito, Ward-2(1), Exemption, Na, Mira Bai Road B Zone, Durgapur. Vs Durgapur, Burdwan-713204 (Pan: Aaatb9527D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Subho Chakraborty, Ar Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Additional Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.10.2024 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.02.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’].

For Appellant: Shri Subho Chakraborty, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Additional CIT, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 11(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 274

section 11(6) was unambiguous and the assessee being a charitable institution was fully aware that such depreciation could not be claimed. Therefore, the disallowance was not mere clerical error but a case of misreporting, justifying the imposition of penalty u/s. 270A

OUTOTEC(FINLAND) OY (NOW MERGED WITH "METSO MINERALS OY" AND THE MERGED ENTITY HAS BEEN RENAMED TO METSO OUTOTEC FINLAND OY),GURUGRAM vs. DCIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 350/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. HukughaSema, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 270ASection 271A

270A of the Act. 5.Initiation of penalty under Section 271A and 271B of the Act a. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO erred in proposing to initiate penalty under Section 271A and 271B of the Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is incorporated in Finland

OUTOTEC (FINLAND) OY (NOW MERGED WITH "METSO MINERALS OY" AND THE MERGED ENTITY HAS BEEN RENAMED TO METSO OUTOTEC FINLAND OY),HARYANA vs. ACIT(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 351/KOL/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. HukughaSema, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 270ASection 271A

270A of the Act. 5.Initiation of penalty under Section 271A and 271B of the Act a. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO erred in proposing to initiate penalty under Section 271A and 271B of the Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is incorporated in Finland

ACIT, CIR.-3(2), GANGTOK vs. M/S RODIC SIKKIM PROJECT PVT. LTD, EAST SIKKIM

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 600/KOL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Years: 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Rodic Sikkim Project Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shanti Nagar, Singtam Income-Tax, Circle-3(2), Gangtok East Sikkim - 737134 (Pan: Aahcr1752J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20/01/2023 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)- Siliguri Vide Appeal No. – 62/Cit(A)/Slg/2017-18 Dated 24/09/2020 For A.Y. 2015-16 Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By Dcit, Circle – 3(2), Gangtok, Dated 30/12/2017. 2. The Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viib)

270A for the said previous year.] Explanation.—For the purposes of this clause,— (a) the fair market value of the shares shall be the value— (i) as may be determined in accordance with such method as may be prescribed; or (ii) as may be substantiated by the company to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, based on the value

DAKSHIN KALIKATA SANSAD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(2), EXEMPTION,, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1576/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1576/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Dakshin Kalikata Sansad,….…..……...……Appellant 93/1B, Rash Behari Avenue, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aaatd5902A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-1(2), Exemption, Kolkata

Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 270ASection 57

depreciation on assets amounting to Rs.15,39,008/-, which would be inadmissible under the provisions of the Income Tax Act and thereby application to charitable and religious purposes of the assessee would be decreased by Rs.15,39,008/-. On perusal of the ITR, it is seen that the assessee has shown interest income of Rs.41,48,848/- under the head

COMMERCIAL HOUSE PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 6(1), KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 601/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 249Section 253Section 270ASection 3Section 5

270A was served upon it. 4 Commercial House Pvt. Limited 4. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, contended that the assessee should be more vigilant about its tax litigation. 5. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit

JAMSHEDPUR CONTINUOUS ANNEALING & PROCESSING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 595/KOL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 154Section 270A

Section 270A of the Act against the Appellant, which is bad in law. 4. Brief facts of the case are that Jamshedpur Continuous Annealing & Processing Co. Pvt Ltd (‘JCAPCPL’ or the assessee’)was incorporated on 17th March 2011 as a wholly owned subsidiary of Tata Steel Limited (TSL). It was later converted into a Joint Venture (JV) between

JAMSHEDPUR CONTINUOUS ANNEALING & PROCESSING COMPANY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 295/KOL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 154Section 270A

Section 270A of the Act against the Appellant, which is bad in law. 4. Brief facts of the case are that Jamshedpur Continuous Annealing & Processing Co. Pvt Ltd (‘JCAPCPL’ or the assessee’)was incorporated on 17th March 2011 as a wholly owned subsidiary of Tata Steel Limited (TSL). It was later converted into a Joint Venture (JV) between

M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 1875/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(5)Section 92BSection 92CSection 92C(3)

270A was initiated for underreporting of income. Aggrieved by this addition, the assessee raised its objection on this issue before the Hon'ble DRP. The Hon'ble DRP- 2, New Delhi vide order u/s 144C(5) dated 11.06.2024 as aforesaid has rejected the objections of the assessee and upheld the addition made on this issue. The relevant part

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. ADARSH HEIGHTS PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1949/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 250Section 253Section 270A

section 253 before the Hon’ble ITAT, Kolkata. The details procedure are furnished below:- 1. Calling for ASR by Ld. Pr. CIT Central-1, Kolkata office 25.06.2024 letter dated 2. Letter received by the AO 25.06.2024 I.T.A. No.: 1949/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Adarsh Heights Pvt. Ltd. 3. ASR furnished by AO before the Addl. CIT Central 19.07.2024 Range

RISHI F.L. ON SHOP,MURSHIDABAD vs. I.T.O., WARD - 42(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1802/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2018-19 Rishi F.L. On Shop, Income Tax Officer, 41/1, K.N. Road, Ranibagan, Vs Ward – 42(2), Murshidabad - 742101 Murshidabad-742101 (Pan: Aahfr9315E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Anil Kochar, AdvFor Respondent: Supriya Pal, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270A

section 144B of the Act. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: “1. For that the orders passed by the lower authorities are arbitrary, erroneous, without proper reasons, invalid and bad-in-law, to the extent to which they are prejudicial to the interests of the appellant. 2. For that