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.

11 results for “depreciation”+ Section 35D(2)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai103Delhi94Chennai37Ahmedabad37Bangalore20Raipur19Hyderabad15Chandigarh12Kolkata11Cochin8Pune6Visakhapatnam5Rajkot5Cuttack4Guwahati3Jaipur3SC2Karnataka2Indore1Agra1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 115J10Section 14A9Addition to Income9Depreciation8Disallowance8Section 316Section 2504Section 92C4Section 143(3)4Transfer Pricing

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2037/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

depreciation are integral to the manufacturing process, has not been able to prove or justify as to how the concerned items enhance the production process or output of the business. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.46,75,775/- being

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

The appeal is dismissed

4
Limitation/Time-bar4
Condonation of Delay4
ITA 1247/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: Disposed
ITAT Kolkata
12 Jan 2026
AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

depreciation are integral to the manufacturing process, has not been able to prove or justify as to how the concerned items enhance the production process or output of the business. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.46,75,775/- being

M/S MBL INFRASTRUCTURES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 427/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, V.P & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.427/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Mbl Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata . 1St Floor, Divine Bliss, 2/3, Judges Court Road, Kolkata – 700027. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccm0564C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Ram Bilash Meena, Cit(Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/10/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/10/2020

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 35DSection 80Section 80I

35D deduction claim & exemption on profit from joint venture(s) and section 14A disallowance involving Rs.1,12,60,000/-, Rs.40,38,000/- & Rs.2,48,10,148/-; respectively. 4. Case file suggests that PCIT termed the foregoing regular assessment as an erroneous one causing prejudice to the interest of the Revenue as follows: I.T.A No.427/Kol/2018 M/s. MBL Infrastructure Ltd. Assessment Year

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1248/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

depreciation are integral to the manufacturing process, has not been able to prove or justify as to how the concerned items enhance the production process or output of the business. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.46,75,775/- being

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1246/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

depreciation are integral to the manufacturing process, has not been able to prove or justify as to how the concerned items enhance the production process or output of the business. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.46,75,775/- being

HALDIA PETROCHEMICALS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1533/KOL/2015[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Harakamal Chakravorty, ARFor Respondent: Shr P.K.Srihari, CIT
Section 115J

c) General administrative and office expenditure which is indirectly related or incidental to construction, including, as may be appropriate, stationery and printing, rent, rates and taxes, postage and telegrams, travel and conveyance etc. (d) Appropriate insurance charges. (e) Appropriate expenditures on maintenance and operation of vehicles. (f) Appropriate expenditures in connection with temporary structures and service facilities built or acquired

DCIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S HALDIA PETROCHEMICALS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 168/KOL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Harakamal Chakravorty, ARFor Respondent: Shr P.K.Srihari, CIT
Section 115J

c) General administrative and office expenditure which is indirectly related or incidental to construction, including, as may be appropriate, stationery and printing, rent, rates and taxes, postage and telegrams, travel and conveyance etc. (d) Appropriate insurance charges. (e) Appropriate expenditures on maintenance and operation of vehicles. (f) Appropriate expenditures in connection with temporary structures and service facilities built or acquired

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), , KOLKATA vs. TCG URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PVT LTD.,, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

ITA 2584/KOL/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. M.L.Meenaआयकर अपील सं.य/

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

c. Rent paid {or Mumbai Office Rs.12,06,482 d. Payment to studio Praxis for Architectural Consultancy fee Rs. 43,200 e. Brokerage paid to Knight Frank India Pvt. Ltd Rs. 3,24,000 f. Depreciation on fixed assets installed at Mumbai Office Rs. 3,97,821 g. Preparation of site plan Rs. 10,000 h. Interest on delayed payment

ACIT, CIRCLE - 5, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SUMAN INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1522/KOL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07

Section 143(3)Section 35D

c, Kolkata Police it can be terminated without warning any notice from either side. So assessee cannot take the view that allowed/obtained was enduring in nature, e) There is no provision under the Act for amortization or for deferment of expense to spread over a given period of time except for case and circumstances referred to u/s. 35D

ITO, WARD - 7(2), KOLKATA vs. OSD COKE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1873/KOL/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri P. B. Pramanik, JCITFor Respondent: S/Shri J. P. Khaitan & J. M. Thard, Advocates
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 31Section 32Section 37(1)

c) of I. T. Act are initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of total income on this issue.” Aggrieved against the action of AO in both the years, assessee went in appeal before CIT(A), who allowed the claim of the assessee and the relevant finding given in AY 2004-05 by CIT(A) in his appellate order in para

ADDL.CIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA vs. OSD COKE PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1874/KOL/2008[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri P. B. Pramanik, JCITFor Respondent: S/Shri J. P. Khaitan & J. M. Thard, Advocates
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 31Section 32Section 37(1)

c) of I. T. Act are initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of total income on this issue.” Aggrieved against the action of AO in both the years, assessee went in appeal before CIT(A), who allowed the claim of the assessee and the relevant finding given in AY 2004-05 by CIT(A) in his appellate order in para