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.

18 results for “depreciation”+ Block Assessmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,585Delhi1,192Chennai566Bangalore525Kolkata389Ahmedabad213Hyderabad120Raipur97Karnataka77Jaipur74Chandigarh68Pune58Amritsar47Indore30Surat25Guwahati23SC22Cuttack21Lucknow18Visakhapatnam18Nagpur17Rajkot15Cochin13Telangana12Ranchi6Dehradun5Allahabad3Panaji3Jabalpur3Calcutta2Jodhpur2Kerala2Patna1Punjab & Haryana1Orissa1Rajasthan1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 143(2)14Addition to Income13Section 143(3)10Section 1489Section 2639Section 41(1)8Section 688Section 142(1)6Disallowance6Section 11(1)(a)

SUBHASH JAISWAL ASSOCIATES,BAREILLY vs. PCIT BAREILLY, BAREILLY

ITA 100/LKW/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 263

block assessment, the\nblock period comprised the assessment years 1988-89 to 1998-99 plus a\nbroken period from April 1, 1998, to July2, 1998. For this broken period of\n3 months, the assessee had shown income of Rs.13,05,103. However,\nthis was not assessed as undisclosed income, since it was reflected in\nthe books of account. The assessee

KHANDELWAL SOYA INDUSTRIES LIMITED ,RAMPUR vs. ACIT(CENTERAL), BAREILLY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the\nterms indicated hereinbefore

ITA 93/LKW/2022[F.Y.2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Aug 2025
Section 127Section 132
4
Depreciation4
Condonation of Delay4
Section 153A
Section 153D
Section 194H

block assessment under section\n153A;\n\n(ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated;\n\n(iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of\nunabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction\nto assess or reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the\nincriminating material unearthed during the search and the other material\navailable with

ITO-6(1), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P. STATE MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,, LUCKNOW

ITA 261/LKW/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow04 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.261/Lkw/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Income Tax Officer Ward-6(1), Lucknow . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Smt. Namita Pandey [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 154Section 250

block of asset as defined by section 2(11) of the Act so does also not entitle for deduction in the form of depreciation. And lastly, impugned item not an expenditure deductible under general deduction 37(1) of the Act for the vanilla reasons that such provision fails to pass the litmus test prescribed therein. Once it so then there

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA U.P.

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 460/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

depreciation of Rs. 14,99,267/- has already been disallowed, the net profit rate of 11% applied by the Assessing Officer is too high when appellant has shown comparatively higher profit margin of 10.13% and 9.68% in subsequent years i.e. A.Y. 2021-22 and A.Y. 2022- 23 to cover up the deficiencies of unproved sundry creditors/remission of liabilities found during

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 349/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

depreciation of Rs. 14,99,267/- has already been disallowed, the net profit rate of 11% applied by the Assessing Officer is too high when appellant has shown comparatively higher profit margin of 10.13% and 9.68% in subsequent years i.e. A.Y. 2021-22 and A.Y. 2022- 23 to cover up the deficiencies of unproved sundry creditors/remission of liabilities found during

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 351/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

depreciation of Rs. 14,99,267/- has already been disallowed, the net profit rate of 11% applied by the Assessing Officer is too high when appellant has shown comparatively higher profit margin of 10.13% and 9.68% in subsequent years i.e. A.Y. 2021-22 and A.Y. 2022- 23 to cover up the deficiencies of unproved sundry creditors/remission of liabilities found during

TECHNICAL ASSOCIATES LIMITED,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT, RANGE-3, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 228/LKW/2023[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri G. D. Padamahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2015-16 Technical Associates Limited V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 8Th Km, Faizabad Road Tax Vijaypur, Gomti Nagar Range 6 Lucknow Lucknow Pan:Aabct7365F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Santhosh Kumar Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 25 06 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25 06 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Santhosh KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 32(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)

Assessing Officer erroneously treated the same as ‘Deduction under section 32(1)(iii) of the Act’ in place of ‘Any Other Deductions’. It was further contended that the block of asset ceases to exist for the reason that all the assets in that block are transferred/sold. The sale consideration from the sale of vehicles is more than the aggregate

DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,KANPUR NAGAR vs. CIT(A) NFAC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 466/LKW/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow04 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(3)

Block, Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur. Kanpur S.O. (Kanpur Nagar) PAN:AAAAD2431M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Written submissions filed by Shri Sudhir Tiwari, Advocate Respondent by Shri S. H. Usmani, CIT (D.R.) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M. (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.466/Lkw/2024 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 against impugned appellate

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT(CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

ITA 350/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 250Section 253(3)

Block-Belsar, \nGonda-271401 \nPAN:ATIPP6520B \n(Appellant)\nVs. A.C.I.T.,\nCentral Circle-2, \nLucknow. \n(Respondent)\nRevenue by Shri H. S. Usmani, CIT (D.R.) \nAssessee by Shri Mahendra Kumar, F.C.A. \nShri Reghunath Mishra, Advocate\nO R D E R\nPER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.\n(A) For the sake of convenience and brevity these appeals and Cross \nObjections

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW vs. M/S PRAG INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, appeal of Revenue and Cross Objection of assessee, both are dismissed

ITA 660/LKW/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat, Videshri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 40A(2)

depreciation, the resultant quantum of disallowance out of assessee’s claim under the head ‘Repairs and Maintenance Expenses’ was computed by the Assessing Officer at Rs.16,77,080/-. At the time of hearing before us, learned CIT, (D.R.) vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer. She read out from the assessment order to claim that the disallowance of aforesaid

MOHD. ASFAND AKHTAR,KANPUR vs. DEPUTI COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC-2, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 139/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. TAN/PAN: AEMPA0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent by: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: (A). These cross appeals have been filed by the assessee and by Revenue against the impugned

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CC-2,, KANPUR vs. SHRI.MOHAMMAD ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 144/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. TAN/PAN: AEMPA0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent by: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: (A). These cross appeals have been filed by the assessee and by Revenue against the impugned

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, KANPUR, KANPUR vs. SHRI MOHAMMAD ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 99/LKW/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145Section 147

Block-B, Scheme-39, Kanpur. Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur. PAN:AEMPA0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent by Smt. Sheela Chopra, CIT (DR) Date of hearing 18/07/2022 Date of pronouncement 05/08/2022 O R D E R PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of learned

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, KANPUR vs. M/S NARAIN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES PVT. LTD., KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 518/LKW/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow09 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. B.P. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69

Block, Shyam Nagar, Kanpur-208013 PAN:AACCN2356B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sh. B.P. Yadav, Advocate Revenue by: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT DR Date of hearing: 28.04.2025 Date of pronouncement: 09.07.2025 O R D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the Department against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-2, Kanpur passed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), BAREILLY vs. VARUNARJUN TRUST, LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 620/LKW/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 12ASection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 153C

assessments. The Assessing Officer in the remand report merely reiterated the statements recorded from the aforesaid persons during survey proceedings and the digital evidence found in the mobile of Shri NavinNishar. We find that these evidences had already been addressed in detail by this tribunal in the order passed in the case of Hemadri Machine Tools Pvt Ltd referred

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY, BAREILLY vs. VARUNARJUN TRUST, LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 619/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 12ASection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 153C

assessments. The Assessing Officer in the remand report merely reiterated the statements recorded from the aforesaid persons during survey proceedings and the digital evidence found in the mobile of Shri NavinNishar. We find that these evidences had already been addressed in detail by this tribunal in the order passed in the case of Hemadri Machine Tools Pvt Ltd referred

UTTAR PRADESH WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION MISSION,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals are partly allowed

ITA 360/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
Section 11(1)(a)Section 143Section 143(2)

Blocks at\nDWSC's\n4,02,900/- 3,93,243/- 09,657/-\n5. SPMU, Allahabad\n1,23,52,081/- 1,22,25,124/- 1,26,957/-\n6. SWSM, Kushinagar\n3,47,000/- NIL 3,47,000/-\nTotal 1,13,24,514/-\nIt is clear that amount of Rs.111,60,41,022/- + RS. 1,13,24,514/-=\nRS.112

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. UTTAR PRADESH WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION MISSION, LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals are partly allowed

ITA 288/LKW/2024[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Nov 2025

Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT\nAND\nSHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 11(1)(a)Section 143Section 143(2)

Blocks at\nDWSC's\n4,02,900/- 3,93,243/- 09,657/-\n\n5. SPMU, Allahabad\n1,23,52,081/- 1,22,25,124/- 1,26,957/-\n\n6. SWSM, Kushinagar\n3,47,000/- NIL 3,47,000/-\nTotal 1,13,24,514/-\n\nIt is clear that amount of Rs.111,60,41,022/- + RS. 1,13,24,514/-=\nRS.112