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.

3 results for “depreciation”+ Section 80Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai40Delhi27Jaipur12Lucknow10Chennai9Cochin8Bangalore5SC3Kolkata3Pune2Hyderabad2Karnataka1Ahmedabad1Chandigarh1Allahabad1Nagpur1Amritsar1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)3Deduction3Depreciation3Section 44A2

SRI NARESH KUMAR SHARMA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 48(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1486/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M. Jagtap] I.T.A. No. 1486/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Naresh Kumar Sharma.............................…………………………………Appellant C/O Sri Jitendra Kaushik, Advocate, 19D, Muktaram Babuy Street, Kolkata - 700007 [Pan : Akups6148K] Income Tax Officer...................……………………………………………….......Respondent Ward 48(3) 3, Govt. Place (W) Kolkata - 700001 Appearances By: Shri Jitendra Kaushik, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 05, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 31, 2017 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) 14, Kolkata, Dated 28.04.2017 & The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Therein Read As Under: 1. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Not Considering That The Ld. Assessing Officer Erred In Not Completing The Assessment By Applying The Provision Of Section 44Ae Of The Act, 1961 2. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Without Prejudice The Ground No 1 The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer Of A Sum Of Rs. 21,52,648/- Under The Head ‘Undisclosed Income’.

Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 80C

section 80C, the total income of Rs. 2,22,397/- was declared by the assessee in the return of income. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was called upon by the A.O. to explain the source of margin money at 10% paid for new trucks purchased during the year under consideration for Rs. 30,78,432/-. The assessee

ITO, WARD-23(3), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY vs. SHRI ARUNASIA SARKAR, HOOGHLY

In the result, both the cross appeals as well as the cross- objection of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 176/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 258/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Arunashis Sarkar................................…………………………………..............................Appellant 16/M, Satish Ch. Ghosh Lane, Mahesh, Serampore, Hooghly – 712 202. [Pan : Cbdps 2458 G] Income Tax Officer..…………………………………………………………........................Respondent Ward No. 1(3), Hooghly, Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 209, G.T. Road, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 101. I.T.A. No. 176/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Income Tax Officer..………………………………………………………….............................Appellant Ward No. 1(3), Hooghly, Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 209, G.T. Road, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 101. Arunashis Sarkar................................…………………………………...........................Respondent 16/M, Satish Ch. Ghosh Lane, Mahesh, Serampore, Hooghly – 712 202. [Pan : Cbdps 2458 G] C.O. No. 19/Kol/2015 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 176/Kol/2015) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Arunashis Sarkar................................…………………………………..............................Appellant 16/M, Satish Ch. Ghosh Lane, Mahesh, Serampore, Hooghly – 712 202. [Pan : Cbdps 2458 G] Income Tax Officer..…………………………………………………………........................Respondent Ward No. 1(3), Hooghly, Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 209, G.T. Road, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 101. Appearances By: Shri K.M. Roy, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit (Dr) Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 08, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 14, 2018

Depreciation 0 1,08,650 Net Profit 4,15,475 9,15,475 4 I.T.A. Nos. 258 & 176/Kol/2015 & C.O. No. 19/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Arunashis Sarkar 3. The A.O. also noted that there was a remarkable difference in the balance sheet figures as well as the deductions claimed by the assessee under Chapter VIA as under: Item Return filed

ARUNASHIS SARKAR,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WD-1(3), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

In the result, both the cross appeals as well as the cross- objection of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 258/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 258/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Arunashis Sarkar................................…………………………………..............................Appellant 16/M, Satish Ch. Ghosh Lane, Mahesh, Serampore, Hooghly – 712 202. [Pan : Cbdps 2458 G] Income Tax Officer..…………………………………………………………........................Respondent Ward No. 1(3), Hooghly, Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 209, G.T. Road, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 101. I.T.A. No. 176/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Income Tax Officer..………………………………………………………….............................Appellant Ward No. 1(3), Hooghly, Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 209, G.T. Road, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 101. Arunashis Sarkar................................…………………………………...........................Respondent 16/M, Satish Ch. Ghosh Lane, Mahesh, Serampore, Hooghly – 712 202. [Pan : Cbdps 2458 G] C.O. No. 19/Kol/2015 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 176/Kol/2015) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Arunashis Sarkar................................…………………………………..............................Appellant 16/M, Satish Ch. Ghosh Lane, Mahesh, Serampore, Hooghly – 712 202. [Pan : Cbdps 2458 G] Income Tax Officer..…………………………………………………………........................Respondent Ward No. 1(3), Hooghly, Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 209, G.T. Road, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 101. Appearances By: Shri K.M. Roy, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit (Dr) Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 08, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 14, 2018

Depreciation 0 1,08,650 Net Profit 4,15,475 9,15,475 4 I.T.A. Nos. 258 & 176/Kol/2015 & C.O. No. 19/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Arunashis Sarkar 3. The A.O. also noted that there was a remarkable difference in the balance sheet figures as well as the deductions claimed by the assessee under Chapter VIA as under: Item Return filed