Search: depreciation | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

6 results for “depreciation”+ Section 115Vclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai6 Hyderabad3 Delhi2

Key Topics

Section 143(3)9 Section 115J9 Section 115V8 Section 1546 Addition to Income6 Section 14A5 Section 1484 Section 139(1)2 Section 92C2 Reassessment2 Deduction2 Disallowance2

VAN OORD INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 720/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: S/Shri Nishant Thakkar, RishiFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, D.R

Section 115VSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 28Section 43CSection 92Section 92(1)Section 92CSection 92C(4)Section 92E

115V to 115VZC of the Income Tax Act. It has been submitted on behalf of the assessee, that ground No.2 pinpoints this grievance. 5. Facts first. The assessee is an Indian company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. It is, during the year, as in the earlier years, inter-alia, engaged in IT(TP)A No.720/MUM/2015 Page

ITO 5(1)(3), MUMBAI vs. CGU LOGISTIC LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6557/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year: 2011-12 Ito-5(1)(3), M/S Cgu Logistic Ltd. Room No.569, 5Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, Prospect बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Chambers, D.N. Road, Fort Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 Pan No. Aaccc8880B (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee)

Section 115VSection 143(3)Section 43A

115V-1(5) read with Rule-11 of I.T. Rules. 2. During hearing of this appeal, the ld. DR, Shri Ganesh Bare, defended the conclusion drawn in assessment order, whereas, the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri Kishor Chaudhari, defended the impugned 3 M/s CGU Logistic Ltd. order by claiming that the impugned issue is covered by the decision

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 3(4) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed and that of the\nrevenue is dismissed

ITA 1970/MUM/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2025AY 2016-2017

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Neha Vikam, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D/R

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

115V-1(2) and\n115V-1(5) respectively. Therefore the income from Reimbursement of overhead for\nmanaged vessel amounting to Rs.35,79,48,794/- is considered as income from\nincidental activity and excluded from the core activity turnover in paral 1.3 (page I lof\n33) of the assessment order. As the income was excluded from the Core activity\nturnover

THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed and that of the\nrevenue is dismissed

ITA 1752/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Neha Vikam, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D/R

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

115V-1(2) and\n115V-1(5) respectively. Therefore the income from Reimbursement of overhead for\nmanaged vessel amounting to Rs.35,79,48,794/- is considered as income from\nincidental activity and excluded from the core activity turnover in paral 1.3 (page I lof\n33) of the assessment order. As the income was excluded from the Core activity\nturnover

TOLANI SHIPPING CO. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT,CIR-5(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 6730/MUM/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2021AY 2004-05

Section 10(33)Section 143(3)Section 14A

depreciation should have been deducted from operation of ships before allowing deduction u/s 33AC. Hence, to rectify the mistake in allowing deduction u/s 33AC and to give final effect to the order of the CIT(A) dated 30.01.2009, an order was passed on 18.05.2010, and the total income was determined at Rs.22,59,46,894/-. 14. The assessee filed

DCIT 5(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. TOLANI SHIPPING CO. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1251/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year : 2006-07 Dy Cit 5(3)(2) Tolani Shipping Co. Ltd., Mumbai 10-A, Bakhtawar, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai 400 021

For Appellant: Shri V JustinFor Respondent: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal

Section 115JSection 115VSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 92C

115V-I of the Income tax Act. As per clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 115VI, the profits from core activities of a company are from operating qualifying ships. The Assessing Officer therefore enhanced the book profits u/s 154 and worked out the same to ` 50,46,75,094/-. The assessee went in appeal before