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.

519 results for “depreciation”+ Search & Seizureclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai519Delhi442Bangalore172Chennai123Hyderabad69Jaipur68Kolkata52Amritsar33Chandigarh33Pune26Guwahati21Lucknow21Ahmedabad17Karnataka11Nagpur11Surat10Raipur9Rajkot8Indore8Cuttack8Visakhapatnam6SC6Allahabad5Cochin5Ranchi4Telangana4Agra3Kerala1Patna1Dehradun1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 153A102Section 143(3)91Addition to Income65Section 13240Section 153C37Depreciation37Search & Seizure36Disallowance36Section 14824Section 271(1)(c)

WIND WORLD WIND RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT -2, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2371/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

search and seizure proceedings the assessee filed its „return of income‟ u/s 153A of the „Act‟ on 27.02.2014, declaring a loss of Rs. 9,53,44,278/-. That during the course of the assessment proceedings it was observed by the A.O that the assessee had not shown any income from its business activities. The A.O thereafter proceeded with and framed

WIND WORLD WIND RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT -2, MUMBAI

Showing 1–20 of 519 · Page 1 of 26

...
22
Section 132(1)21
Section 6817

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2372/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

search and seizure proceedings the assessee filed its „return of income‟ u/s 153A of the „Act‟ on 27.02.2014, declaring a loss of Rs. 9,53,44,278/-. That during the course of the assessment proceedings it was observed by the A.O that the assessee had not shown any income from its business activities. The A.O thereafter proceeded with and framed

WIND WORLD INDIA INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT -2, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2370/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

search and seizure proceedings the assessee filed its „return of income‟ u/s 153A of the „Act‟ on 27.02.2014, declaring a loss of Rs. 9,53,44,278/-. That during the course of the assessment proceedings it was observed by the A.O that the assessee had not shown any income from its business activities. The A.O thereafter proceeded with and framed

J.N INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 2, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2373/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

search and seizure proceedings the assessee filed its „return of income‟ u/s 153A of the „Act‟ on 27.02.2014, declaring a loss of Rs. 9,53,44,278/-. That during the course of the assessment proceedings it was observed by the A.O that the assessee had not shown any income from its business activities. The A.O thereafter proceeded with and framed

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4511/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

search and seizure action was never executed at the business premises of the assessee firm. Disregarding the provisions of law notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee firm to which the assessee filed the return of income, under protest, claiming the same deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. So far as, legal issue/jurisdictional issue

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4512/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

search and seizure action was never executed at the business premises of the assessee firm. Disregarding the provisions of law notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee firm to which the assessee filed the return of income, under protest, claiming the same deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. So far as, legal issue/jurisdictional issue

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4513/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

search and seizure action was never executed at the business premises of the assessee firm. Disregarding the provisions of law notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee firm to which the assessee filed the return of income, under protest, claiming the same deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. So far as, legal issue/jurisdictional issue

MAHADHAN AGRITECH LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SMARTECHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD ) ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-50, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2226/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mahadhan Agritech Ltd. (Formerly Cit(A)-50, Dcit Cen. 8(1), Known As Smartchem Technologies 656, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Ltd.), Mumbai-400021. Survey No. 93, Sai Hira, Mundhwa, Pune-411036. Pan No. Aacca 5046 P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: 28/11/2024
Section 132Section 153ASection 69A

depreciation claim. It is stated that the said appeal is presently pending adjudication. pending adjudication. 2.1 Subsequently, a search and seizure

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

ITA 1970/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/
Section 132(1)Section 153C

depreciation on electrical equipment and (vi) expenses related to exempt income u/s 80IA of the Act. and (vi) expenses related to exempt income u/s 80IA and (vi) expenses related to exempt income u/s 80IA 3.2 Subsequently, consequent to the search action by the Central consequent to the search action by the Central consequent to the search action by the Central

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

ITA 1020/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/
Section 132(1)Section 153C

depreciation on electrical equipment and (vi) expenses related to exempt income u/s 80IA of the Act. and (vi) expenses related to exempt income u/s 80IA and (vi) expenses related to exempt income u/s 80IA 3.2 Subsequently, consequent to the search action by the Central consequent to the search action by the Central consequent to the search action by the Central

M/S.BALAJI BULLION & COMMODITIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-40, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 1291/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Balaji Bullion & Commodities The Dy. Commissioner Of (India) Private Limited Income–Tax, 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Central Circle–40, Vs. House Zavri Baazar, Mumbai Mumbai-400 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcbo236F Balaji Universal Tradelinks P. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income–Tax, 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Central Circle–40, Vs. House Zavri Baazar, Mumbai Mumbai-400 002

For Appellant: Shri N.M. Porwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 153ASection 153BSection 37Section 68

Depreciation. Looking to the facts and in the circumstances of your Appellant's case the said disallowance made by the Ld. A.O. is incorrect and invalid and ought to be deleted. 13. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. A. O. erred in making an addition

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI vs. SUPERWAYS ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed and assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3972/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

depreciation. Ground Nos. 10 and 11 are on deletion of addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. 5. In so far as assessee’s appeal, being ITA No. 3140/Mum/2025 is concerned, Ground No. 1 to 5 are on various legal issues challenging the validity of the impugned assessment order. Whereas Ground No.6, which is overlapping with Ground

SUPERWAYS ENTERPIRSES PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed and assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3140/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

depreciation. Ground Nos. 10 and 11 are on deletion of addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. 5. In so far as assessee’s appeal, being ITA No. 3140/Mum/2025 is concerned, Ground No. 1 to 5 are on various legal issues challenging the validity of the impugned assessment order. Whereas Ground No.6, which is overlapping with Ground

SUPERWAYS ENTERPIRSES PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed and assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3144/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

depreciation. Ground Nos. 10 and 11 are on deletion of addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. 5. In so far as assessee’s appeal, being ITA No. 3140/Mum/2025 is concerned, Ground No. 1 to 5 are on various legal issues challenging the validity of the impugned assessment order. Whereas Ground No.6, which is overlapping with Ground

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI vs. SUPERWAYS ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed and assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3976/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

depreciation. Ground Nos. 10 and 11 are on deletion of addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. 5. In so far as assessee’s appeal, being ITA No. 3140/Mum/2025 is concerned, Ground No. 1 to 5 are on various legal issues challenging the validity of the impugned assessment order. Whereas Ground No.6, which is overlapping with Ground

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI vs. SUPERWAYS ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed and assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3993/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

depreciation. Ground Nos. 10 and 11 are on deletion of addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. 5. In so far as assessee’s appeal, being ITA No. 3140/Mum/2025 is concerned, Ground No. 1 to 5 are on various legal issues challenging the validity of the impugned assessment order. Whereas Ground No.6, which is overlapping with Ground

SUPERWAYS ENTERPIRSES PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed and assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3146/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

depreciation. Ground Nos. 10 and 11 are on deletion of addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. 5. In so far as assessee’s appeal, being ITA No. 3140/Mum/2025 is concerned, Ground No. 1 to 5 are on various legal issues challenging the validity of the impugned assessment order. Whereas Ground No.6, which is overlapping with Ground

SUPERWAYS ENTERPIRSES PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed and assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3145/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

depreciation. Ground Nos. 10 and 11 are on deletion of addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. 5. In so far as assessee’s appeal, being ITA No. 3140/Mum/2025 is concerned, Ground No. 1 to 5 are on various legal issues challenging the validity of the impugned assessment order. Whereas Ground No.6, which is overlapping with Ground

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI vs. SUPERWAYS ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed and assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3975/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

depreciation. Ground Nos. 10 and 11 are on deletion of addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. 5. In so far as assessee’s appeal, being ITA No. 3140/Mum/2025 is concerned, Ground No. 1 to 5 are on various legal issues challenging the validity of the impugned assessment order. Whereas Ground No.6, which is overlapping with Ground

SUPERWAYS ENTERPIRSES PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeals are dismissed and assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3143/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth SrivastavaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

depreciation. Ground Nos. 10 and 11 are on deletion of addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. 5. In so far as assessee’s appeal, being ITA No. 3140/Mum/2025 is concerned, Ground No. 1 to 5 are on various legal issues challenging the validity of the impugned assessment order. Whereas Ground No.6, which is overlapping with Ground