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.

9 results for “depreciation”+ Section 268Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Cochin29Ahmedabad17Delhi13Mumbai9Karnataka7Jaipur3Chennai2Amritsar1Bangalore1

Key Topics

Section 44B23Section 143(3)6Section 145A6Depreciation6Section 14A3Addition to Income3Section 115J2Disallowance2

DCIT-6(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. ARMSTRONG ENERGY PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, in view of above appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 1941/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Gagan Goyaldcit –6(1) (1), R. No. 502, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road Mumbai-400 020 ...... Appellant Vs. M/S Armstrong Energy Pvt. Ltd. 5Th Floor, Militia Apartment, Mathar Pakhadi Road, Mazgaon, Mumbai-400 030 Pan – Aafca3807R ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Raghuveer Madanappa, Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Saboo, Ld. AR
Section 10(38)Section 250

section 268A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” 5. It is observed through the computation of statutory total income furnished by the assessee, that department wrongly taken the figure of Rs. 2,04,00,869/- for the purposes of depreciation

BLUE DART EXPRESS LTD,MUMBAI vs. JT CIT (OSD) RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4153/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: D.T. Garasia & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar, D.R

depreciation 60% on the cargo scanners. Accordingly, this issue has been decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue.” 7. Respectfully following the above decision of the Tribunal, we decide the ground No.1 in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Ground No.2 8. Ground No.2 is in relation to disallowance under section

DCIT 8(1), MUMBAI vs. BLUE DART EXPRESS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4433/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: D.T. Garasia & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar, D.R

depreciation 60% on the cargo scanners. Accordingly, this issue has been decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue.” 7. Respectfully following the above decision of the Tribunal, we decide the ground No.1 in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Ground No.2 8. Ground No.2 is in relation to disallowance under section

DCIT 8(1), MUMBAI vs. BLUE DART EXPRESS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2004/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: D.T. Garasia & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar, D.R

depreciation 60% on the cargo scanners. Accordingly, this issue has been decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue.” 7. Respectfully following the above decision of the Tribunal, we decide the ground No.1 in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Ground No.2 8. Ground No.2 is in relation to disallowance under section

BLUE DART EXRESS LTD,MUMBAI vs. JCIT (OSD) RG 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1949/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: D.T. Garasia & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar, D.R

depreciation 60% on the cargo scanners. Accordingly, this issue has been decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue.” 7. Respectfully following the above decision of the Tribunal, we decide the ground No.1 in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Ground No.2 8. Ground No.2 is in relation to disallowance under section

SEADRILL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-4(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4700/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2021-22
Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 270ASection 44B

depreciation and brought forward loss shall be allowed to the assessee for such previous year. ] Explanation. For the purposes of this section,— (i) "plant" includes ships, aircraft, vehicles, drilling units, scientific apparatus and equipment, used for the purposes of the said business; (ii) "mineral oil" includes petroleum and natural gas. 7. For the purpose of receipt under section 44BB

ASST CIT CIR 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. ASK INVESTMENT MANAGERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 534/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2012-13 Acit M/S Ask Investment Circle-6(1)(2), Managers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.536, 5Th Floor, 1St Floor Bandbox House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M. K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400030 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aafca2302P Shri Nitin Waghmode-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri J.D. Mistri Sr. Advocate

Section 115JSection 14A

section 14A is that expenditure incurred in relation to income, which does not form part of total income under the Act, shall not be allowed as deduction. This clearly implies that assessee should have earned some income during the relevant previous year, which does not form part of the total income under the provisions of the Act and some expenditure

OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL GMBH,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) RANGE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 6705/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri A.K. JawadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 172Section 44B

depreciation of earlier years), the balancing charge/allowance and the apportionment of overhead expenses. With a view to simplifying and rationalizing the assessments in such cases, the Finance Act, 1975 has made a special provision in section 44B for computing profits and gains of shipping business in the case of non-residents. Under this provision, profits and gains

OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL GMBH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(INT. TAXATION)RANGE-3(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 802/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Abdul Kadir Jawadwala ARFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 145ASection 153Section 254(1)Section 44B

depreciation of earlier years), the balancing charge/allowance and the apportionment of overhead expenses. With a view to simplifying and rationalizing the assessments in such cases, the Finance Act, 1975 has made a special provision in section 44B for computing profits and gains of shipping business in the case of non-residents. Under this provision, profits and gains