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.

101 results for “depreciation”+ Section 40A(9)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai535Delhi415Bangalore146Chennai105Kolkata101Raipur93Ahmedabad61Amritsar48Jaipur43Hyderabad35Surat33Chandigarh25Pune20Indore20Cochin16Visakhapatnam15Guwahati9Lucknow9Rajkot8Cuttack7Varanasi5Karnataka4Jodhpur4Agra3Dehradun3Patna3Ranchi3SC3Nagpur2Jabalpur1Allahabad1Telangana1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)92Disallowance69Addition to Income63Section 14A43Section 4043Section 115J40Deduction39Section 80I32Section 26332Depreciation

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1223/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

40a(i) could be made. We note that the assessee has made remittances to 8 foreign parties which need to be examined at the level of the AO in the light of DTAAs and ascertain whether the assessee is covered under the Treaties. Needless to mention that if the AO can also find out about the examination

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 101 · Page 1 of 6

32
Section 40A(3)29
Limitation/Time-bar18
ITA 1166/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: Disposed
ITAT Kolkata
10 May 2024
AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

40a(i) could be made. We note that the assessee has made remittances to 8 foreign parties which need to be examined at the level of the AO in the light of DTAAs and ascertain whether the assessee is covered under the Treaties. Needless to mention that if the AO can also find out about the examination

DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1222/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

40a(i) could be made. We note that the assessee has made remittances to 8 foreign parties which need to be examined at the level of the AO in the light of DTAAs and ascertain whether the assessee is covered under the Treaties. Needless to mention that if the AO can also find out about the examination

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, RANGE-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1068/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 37

40a(i) could be made. We note that the assessee has made remittances to 8 foreign parties which need to be examined at the level of the AO in the light of DTAAs and ascertain whether the assessee is covered under the Treaties. Needless to mention that if the AO can also find out about the examination

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. LUCKY GOLD STAR COMPANY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1382/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

9(Note 22), Depreciation etc (Note 23) and Administrative & Selling & Distribution expenses (Note 24) which aggregates to ₹2,06,51,871/-. As such, the disallowance of indirect expenses aggregating to ₹2,06,51,871/- as per Note 21 to 24 is not sustainable being unfounded. As regards the application of the provisions of section 37 of Income

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. LUCKY GOLD STAR COMPANY LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1381/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

9(Note 22), Depreciation etc (Note 23) and Administrative & Selling & Distribution expenses (Note 24) which aggregates to ₹2,06,51,871/-. As such, the disallowance of indirect expenses aggregating to ₹2,06,51,871/- as per Note 21 to 24 is not sustainable being unfounded. As regards the application of the provisions of section 37 of Income

RADHEYSHYAM GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-9, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 187/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: : Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं"या/ I.T.A. No. 187/कोल/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Radheyshyam Gupta...…………............... (अपीलाथ"/Appellant [Pan: Adjpg 3274 G] Vs. Pcit-9, Kolkata........................................(""यथ")/Respondent Appearances By: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv. & Smt. Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Md. Ghayas Uddin, Cit, (D/R), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of The Hearing : July 19Th, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : Sept 09Th, 2022 Order Per Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2017-18 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax-9, Kolkata [In Short

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

40A(3) of the Act. Therefore, the ld. PCIT has rightly held that the ld. AO has not examined the issue and therefore, the same is to be re-examined by the ld.AO 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us and carefully gone through the judgments and the decisions referred

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. EPCOS FERRITES LTD., (SINCE MERGED WITH M/S. EPCOS INDIA P. LTD.,), NADIA

In the result, the both appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed, except other ground no

ITA 1597/KOL/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jan 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Rituparna SinhaFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(7)Section 40A(9)Section 43BSection 80H

40A (9), for A.Y. 2003­04 Rs. 5,47,224/­ (ii).Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account of provision for tax at Rs.7,50,000/­. This ground is raised by Revenue in A.Y.2002­03. (iii). Ground Nos. 6, 7, 8, and 9 raised by the Revenue are interlinked and common. These grounds relate to computation

DHRUB NARAYAN BHADANI,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-39, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 28/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Nov 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 28/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dhrub Narayan Bhadani..............................………………………………………...Appellant C/O. B.S. Sahay & Co., Room No. 431, Centre Point, 21, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Akdpb3207D] A.C.I.T., Cir 39, Kolkata………………………………………………......................Respondent 3, Govt. Place, Kolkata - 700001 Appearances By: Shri R.S. Sahay, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri D.Z. Chowngthu, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 08, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 10, 2017 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) – 11, Kolkata Dated 16.10.2015. 2. Ground No 1 Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Reads As Under: “The Ld. Cit (A) Is Not Justified In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 4,05,130/- Being 50% Of Total Purchases On Estimate Made By The Ld. A.O. & Has Also Been Unjustified In Further Enhancing The Same By Rs. 4,05,130/- By Erroneously Holding The Same To Be Violative Of Provisions Of Section 40A(3) Without Appreciating The Fact That Section 40A(3) Was Not Applicable. The Addition Is Based On Surmises & Conjectures & Totally Against Facts Of The Case Itself As There Has Been No Single Instance Of Payment Exceeding 20,000/- To Any Party On Any Daty.”

Section 40A(3)

9,10,260/-. 3 I.T.A. No. 28/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dhrub Narayan Bhadani 5. We have heard the arguments of both the sides on this issue and also perused the relevant material available on record. As pointed out by the learned counsel for the assessee from the relevant details placed at page no 17 to 26, none

M/S. EVEREADY INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 805/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

depreciation claimed 7. Large value sale of consideration of property in ITR is less than sale consideration of property reported in TDS return under section 194IA 8. Mismatch in sales turnover reported in Audit Report and ITR 9. Mismatch in amount paid to related persons u/s 40A

DCIT, CIRCLE - 4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TATA TEA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2105/KOL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: S/Shri Manish Sheth & Prasun Kr. Maity, ARsFor Respondent: N o n e
Section 143(3)

40A(9) is not applicable because this section stands for any funds, institutions, where the assessee made the subscription for the purpose of welfare of the employees. That means that there should be a complete identity between the donor and the done. Here staff recreation club and the staff club were a part and parcel of the Tata

TATA TEA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, C IRCLE- 4, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 511/KOL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: S/Shri Manish Sheth & Prasun Kr. Maity, ARsFor Respondent: N o n e
Section 143(3)

40A(9) is not applicable because this section stands for any funds, institutions, where the assessee made the subscription for the purpose of welfare of the employees. That means that there should be a complete identity between the donor and the done. Here staff recreation club and the staff club were a part and parcel of the Tata

DCIT, CENTRAL CIR. VI, KOLKATA vs. M/S J.K. LAKSHMI CEMENT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s CO is partly allowed

ITA 611/KOL/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 May 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Partha Sarathi Chowdhury

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

depreciation to be allowed for unlimited years. It is a fact that the amendment in section 32(2) by the Finance Act will be effective from 1st April 2002, but intention behind the amendment could only be interpreted as if it has the effect retrospectively. In addition to above we also find that the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court

M/S AB (WINES) STORES,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOLKATA-14, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 901/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.901/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ab (Wines) Stores -Vs.- Pr. C.I.T., Kolkata-14 Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aajfa 6312 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri R.S.Biswas, Cit Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 Order

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.S.Biswas, CIT
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

9. It was next submitted that no enquiry was done by the Assessing Officer to find out whether the donor Mr Deepak Modi (father) had received money from M/s. Chang Jiang as claimed. Nor any inquiry was done to find out whether the sister had in fact earned amounts on account of Foreign Exchange Transactions as claimed

EASTERN COALFILELDS LTD.,,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2,, ASANSOL

In the result, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 916/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkeyi.T.A. No. 1010/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Eastern Coalfields Ltd....................………………..…………….………………………………..………Assessee [Pan :Aaace 7590 E] Jcit, R-2, Asansol………………..…………………………………………………….……………………....Revenue &

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35ESection 40A(3)Section 40A(9)

9), u/s 40A(3) of the Act arise in the appeal. Other miscellaneous issues, also arise for our adjudication in these appeals. 3. We have heard Shri Arvind Agarwal, the ld. Counsel for the assessee and Shri P. K. Srihari, the ld. CIT-DR, on behalf of the Revenue. On a careful consideration on the facts and circumstances

DCIT, CIR-2, ASANSOL, ASANSOL vs. M/S EASTERN COALFIELS LTD., BURDWAN

In the result, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1015/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2019AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkeyi.T.A. No. 1010/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Eastern Coalfields Ltd....................………………..…………….………………………………..………Assessee [Pan :Aaace 7590 E] Jcit, R-2, Asansol………………..…………………………………………………….……………………....Revenue &

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35ESection 40A(3)Section 40A(9)

9), u/s 40A(3) of the Act arise in the appeal. Other miscellaneous issues, also arise for our adjudication in these appeals. 3. We have heard Shri Arvind Agarwal, the ld. Counsel for the assessee and Shri P. K. Srihari, the ld. CIT-DR, on behalf of the Revenue. On a careful consideration on the facts and circumstances

ACIT, CIRCLE-2, ASANSOL, ASANSOL vs. M/S EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BURDWAN

In the result, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 999/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkeyi.T.A. No. 1010/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Eastern Coalfields Ltd....................………………..…………….………………………………..………Assessee [Pan :Aaace 7590 E] Jcit, R-2, Asansol………………..…………………………………………………….……………………....Revenue &

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35ESection 40A(3)Section 40A(9)

9), u/s 40A(3) of the Act arise in the appeal. Other miscellaneous issues, also arise for our adjudication in these appeals. 3. We have heard Shri Arvind Agarwal, the ld. Counsel for the assessee and Shri P. K. Srihari, the ld. CIT-DR, on behalf of the Revenue. On a careful consideration on the facts and circumstances

EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD.,BURDWAN vs. JCIT, R-2, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1010/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2019AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri A. T. Varkeyi.T.A. No. 1010/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Eastern Coalfields Ltd....................………………..…………….………………………………..………Assessee [Pan :Aaace 7590 E] Jcit, R-2, Asansol………………..…………………………………………………….……………………....Revenue &

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 35ESection 40A(3)Section 40A(9)

9), u/s 40A(3) of the Act arise in the appeal. Other miscellaneous issues, also arise for our adjudication in these appeals. 3. We have heard Shri Arvind Agarwal, the ld. Counsel for the assessee and Shri P. K. Srihari, the ld. CIT-DR, on behalf of the Revenue. On a careful consideration on the facts and circumstances

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 357/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

9,12,625/- and added to the total income of assessee. 18. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee before Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the depreciation was claimed on computers as per the rates specified in the Appendix-1 of the Income Tax Rule, 1962. The assessee without prejudiced to the above also submitted that

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

9,12,625/- and added to the total income of assessee. 18. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee before Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the depreciation was claimed on computers as per the rates specified in the Appendix-1 of the Income Tax Rule, 1962. The assessee without prejudiced to the above also submitted that