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.

30 results for “disallowance”+ Section 32Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai118Delhi83Kolkata30Bangalore28Hyderabad21Indore17Ahmedabad13Pune11SC7Chennai6Guwahati6Chandigarh5Lucknow4Jaipur3Visakhapatnam3Calcutta2Telangana2Cochin2Cuttack1Surat1Karnataka1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)28Addition to Income19Depreciation17Section 143(1)16Section 143(2)15Section 26314Section 115J14Section 80I13Deduction10Section 11

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6,, KOLKATA vs. LOKNATH SARAF SECURITIES LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, to sum up ITA No

ITA 852/KOL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jul 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 43(5)Section 73

disallowed by him in the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 13.12.2005. 6. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) challenging, inter alia, the action of the Assessing Officer in I.T.A. No. 852/KOL./2008 Assessment year: 2003-2004 Assessment

D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PARIJAT VYAPAAR PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2241/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2018

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2

9
Section 2508
Disallowance8
AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)

section 32A of the Act. The issue before us has been answered by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka (supra), so we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in allowing depreciation @ 30% on dumper and tipper. Therefore, we uphold the same. This appeal of Revenue is dismissed.” Accordingly, respectfully following the consistent

D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PARIJAT VYAPAAR PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2242/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)

section 32A of the Act. The issue before us has been answered by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka (supra), so we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in allowing depreciation @ 30% on dumper and tipper. Therefore, we uphold the same. This appeal of Revenue is dismissed.” Accordingly, respectfully following the consistent

DCIT, CEN. CIR-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PARIJAT VYAPAAR PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1296/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

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

Section 32ASection 32A(2)(b)

disallowed 15% excess depreciation in this year. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who directed the AO to allow depreciation @ 30% on dumper and tipper by following various judgments of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. Aggrieved, revenue is now in appeal before us. We note that the issue

DCIT, CIR. 4(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S AMALGAMATED PLANTATIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 451/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S Amalgamated Plantations Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle 4(1) Unit No.302A, 3Rd Floor, Elgin 8Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Aaykarbhavan, Kolkata Chambers, Ashutosh Vs. West Bengal-700069 Mukherjee Road, 1A, Kolkata-700020, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca6995B Assessee By : Shri Pratushjhunjhunwala, Ar Revenue By : Shri Amuldeep Kaur, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri PratushJhunjhunwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amuldeep Kaur, DR
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 80I

disallowance of ₹5,82,61,479/- claimed by the appellant u/s 80IE of the Act.” 06. The ld. AR submitted that Section 80-IE was enacted to encourage industrialization of the North Eastern States including Assam by providing for a ten-year tax holiday. It applies to a new undertaking which begins manufacture or production of any eligible article

M/S. UJJAL TRANSPORT AGENCY,ASANSOL vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-XVI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee's CO is partly allowed”

ITA 1601/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1601/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Ujjal Transport Agency, -Vs- Dcit, Central, Circle-Xvi, Kolkata G.T.Road(East), Murgasole Asansol Pan : Aaafu 6732 H] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : A. K. Tibrewal, Fca Amit Agarwal, Adv. For The Respondent : None Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.07.2014 Order

For Appellant: A. K. Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: None
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 263Section 32(1)(iia)

section 32A. The ITO held that the mere fact of being engaged in removing over-burden and extraction of coal for others would not 4 5 Ujjal Transport Agency A.Yr.07-08 make the assessee-firm an industrial undertaking. He also observed that it was merely letting the machinery on hire and it was immaterial how such machinery was being

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S INDIAN OIL PETRONAS (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1930/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr.A.L.Saini, Am D.C.I.T, Cir­10(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Indian Oil Petronas Pvt. Ltd. Pan: Aaaci5573R (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. Assessee/Revenue By : Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit, Ld. Dr Respondent/Assessee By : Shrid. S Damle, Fca, Ld.Ar सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 18/12/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/03/2019 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: ShriD. S Damle, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT, ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 2Section 37(1)Section 40

section 32A of the Act. It was inter alia observed as under: " ... There is no dispute that the plant in respect of which the assessee claimed deduction was owned by it and WDS installed after 31-3-1976, in the assessee's industrial undertaking for excavating, mining and processing mineral ore Mineral ore is not excluded by the Eleventh Schedule

ACIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2613/KOL/2005[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

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

Section 143(3)

section 115JA(1) although quantification of that right depends upon the ultimate determination of total income for the first assessment year.’ Therefore, as righty pointed out by the ld. SR. counsel for the assessee, first the total income has to be determined for the assessment year 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. We, accordingly, restore the matter back to the file

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1019/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

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

Section 143(3)

section 115JA(1) although quantification of that right depends upon the ultimate determination of total income for the first assessment year.’ Therefore, as righty pointed out by the ld. SR. counsel for the assessee, first the total income has to be determined for the assessment year 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. We, accordingly, restore the matter back to the file

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 852/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

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

Section 143(3)

section 115JA(1) although quantification of that right depends upon the ultimate determination of total income for the first assessment year.’ Therefore, as righty pointed out by the ld. SR. counsel for the assessee, first the total income has to be determined for the assessment year 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. We, accordingly, restore the matter back to the file

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 488/KOL/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

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

Section 143(3)

section 115JA(1) although quantification of that right depends upon the ultimate determination of total income for the first assessment year.’ Therefore, as righty pointed out by the ld. SR. counsel for the assessee, first the total income has to be determined for the assessment year 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. We, accordingly, restore the matter back to the file

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S INDIAN OIL PETRONAS (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1885/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250Section 32(1)(iiia)Section 80

32A of the Act. It was inter alia observed as under: " ... There is no dispute that the plant in respect of which the assessee claimed deduction was owned by it and WDS installed after 31-3-1976, in the assessee's industrial undertaking for excavating, mining and processing mineral ore Mineral ore is not excluded by the Eleventh Schedule

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S INDIAN OIL PETRONAS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1884/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250Section 32(1)(iiia)Section 80

32A of the Act. It was inter alia observed as under: " ... There is no dispute that the plant in respect of which the assessee claimed deduction was owned by it and WDS installed after 31-3-1976, in the assessee's industrial undertaking for excavating, mining and processing mineral ore Mineral ore is not excluded by the Eleventh Schedule

NEETU AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1898/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1898/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Neetu Agarwal………………………………………………………….…..……Appellant Flat 6C, Block 2, Shree Ramnagar Residential Complex, Vip Road, Tegharia, W.B – 700052. [Pan: Actpa2426P] Vs. Ito, Kolkata……………..............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Puja Agarwal, A.R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.07.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee Is A Resident Individual, Who Filed Her Return Of Income On 29.12.2021 For The Financial Year 2020-21 Relevant To Assessment Year 2021-22 Reporting A Total Income Of Rs.25,58,440/-. The Assessee Discharged Her Tax Liability By Way Of Tax Deducted At Source Amounting To Rs.2,80,028/-, Self-Assessment Tax Of Rs.22,740/- & Foreign Tax Credit (‘Ftc’) Of Rs.2,25,936/-. The Assessee Also Filed Form.67 Which Was Filed On 25.01.2022. An Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act Was Issued On 28.10.2022 In Which The Ftc Was Not Provided To The Assessee. This Disallowance Resulted In Tax Demand Of Rs.2,79,130/-.

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

disallowing of FTC claim made by the petitioner and hence, the first respondent is directed to consider only on the aspect of rejection of FTC claim within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” 19. Respectfully following the order of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy

NEETU AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 7(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 67/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Puja Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Abhishek Kumar, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 250Section 90

disallowing of FTC claim made by the petitioner and hence, the first 10 Neetu Agarwal AY: 2020-21 respondent is directed to consider only on the aspect of rejection of FTC claim within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” 19. Respectfully following the order of the Hon’ble Madras High Court

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ORISSA MANGANESE & MINERALS LTD., , KOLKATA

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

ITA 2152/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

32A applies. Further in the case of Integrated Coal Mining Ltd. vs DCIT in [2016] 67 taxmann.com 260, the Honble Kolkata ITAT held as under. "Mining of coal is production of coal and assessee engaged in mining of coal would be entitled to additional depreciation Oil survey instrument acquired during year Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Depreciation

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ORISSA MANGANESE & MINERALS LTD., , KOLKATA

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

ITA 2150/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

32A applies. Further in the case of Integrated Coal Mining Ltd. vs DCIT in [2016] 67 taxmann.com 260, the Honble Kolkata ITAT held as under. "Mining of coal is production of coal and assessee engaged in mining of coal would be entitled to additional depreciation Oil survey instrument acquired during year Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Depreciation

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ORISSA MANGANESE & MINERALS LTD., , KOLKATA

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

ITA 2153/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. P.M.Jagtap & Sh. S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

32A applies. Further in the case of Integrated Coal Mining Ltd. vs DCIT in [2016] 67 taxmann.com 260, the Honble Kolkata ITAT held as under. "Mining of coal is production of coal and assessee engaged in mining of coal would be entitled to additional depreciation Oil survey instrument acquired during year Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Depreciation

ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. MCNALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2251/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner Of Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Limited Kolkata. Vs. 2/7, Sarat Bose Road, Vasundhara Apartment, 2Nd Floor, West Bengal-700020. (Pan: Aaccs 5491 A) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Pransukhka, FCA
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36(1)(vs)

section 32A of the IBC and submitted that it relates to offences committed prior to the commencement of corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) which is not a case in the present appeals. 6.1. On the merits of the case, Ld. CIT, DR fairly conceded that case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High

ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. MCNALLY SAYAJI ENGINEERING LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2416/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner Of Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Limited Kolkata. Vs. 2/7, Sarat Bose Road, Vasundhara Apartment, 2Nd Floor, West Bengal-700020. (Pan: Aaccs 5491 A) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Pransukhka, FCA
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36(1)(vs)

section 32A of the IBC and submitted that it relates to offences committed prior to the commencement of corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) which is not a case in the present appeals. 6.1. On the merits of the case, Ld. CIT, DR fairly conceded that case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High