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.

80 results for “depreciation”+ Section 54Eclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai80 Chandigarh42 Kolkata8 Delhi7 Jaipur6 Karnataka3 Calcutta3 Nagpur2 SC2 Surat1 Ahmedabad1 Bangalore1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 5082 Section 54E58 Section 14A49 Section 143(3)41 Section 115J35 Section 54F35 Penalty30 Addition to Income30 Disallowance27 Capital Gains

SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 261/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar & Chaitanya

Section 112Section 194CSection 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 50

depreciable asset under section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under section 50. Section 54E specifically

Showing 1–20 of 80 · Page 1 of 4

26

Short Term Capital Gains24

TATA COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the question of law referred to the Special Bench is answered in favour of the assessee

ITA 3515/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Arun Khodpiatata Communications Limited Pr. Cit, Videsh Sanchar Bhavan, Mumbai-1 Vs. M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 2808 C (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri J. D. Mistri Respondent By : Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey: The Present Appeal, At The Instance Of The Assessee, Assails Order Dated 21.03.2025, Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short), By Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (‘Ld. Pcit’ For Short), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Multiple Grounds, Both On Jurisdictional Issues As Well As On Merits, However, There Is Consensus Between The Parties That The Appeal Can Be Decided On Merits, In Which Event, There Is No Need To Go Into Various Other Issues Raised In Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri J. D. MistriFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR

Section 112Section 143(3)Section 263Section 50

depreciable asset under section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under section 50. Section 54E specifically

DCIT 4(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE TRANSPORT AND TRAVELS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5683/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman: A.Y : 2013-14 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Reliance Transport & Tax – 4(3)(1), Travels Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai (Appellant) 6Th Floor, Nagin Mahal, 82, Veer Nariman Road, Churchgate, Mumbai 400 020. Pan : Aaacr2380M (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh YadavFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Thar

depreciable asset under section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under section 50. Section 54E specifically

ACIT 421 MUMBAI, MUMBAI CITY vs. SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI, MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the\nappeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1022/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Section 112Section 194CSection 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 50

depreciable asset under section 54E cannot be denied by referring\nto the fiction created under section 50. Section 54E specifically

DCITCC 3(2) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. HRISHIKESH D. PAI, MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 2766/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2766/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बिाम/ Dcit, Cc 3(2) Cen Rg 3 Shri Hrishikesh D. Pai, R.No. 1913, 19Th Floor, C/O M/S. Pregnancy Air India Building, Advice & Services, V. Nariman Point, 304, Pearl Centre, Mumbai S.B. Marg, Dadar, Mumbai 400028 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabpp2139C (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri. Manoj Kumar Singh, Dr Assessee By : Shri. Vijay Mehta सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement :26.09.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 2766/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 05.12.2016 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2012-13, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 30.03.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2012-13. I.T.A. No.2766/Mum/2017

For Appellant: Shri. Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri. Manoj Kumar Singh, DR

Section 143(3)Section 253(3)Section 50Section 54FSection 69B

depreciable asset under Section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under Section 50. Section 54E specifically

FRANK S INTERNATIONAL ITL LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(IT), CIRCLE (2)(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the question of law referred to the Special Bench is answered in favour of the\nassessee

ITA 5429/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 50Section 50(1)

depreciable asset under Section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the\nfiction created under Section 50. Section 54E specifically

TRAVOTEL (I) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 2(3)-3, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1551/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri J P Boaz & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 50Section 54E

depreciable asset under section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under section 50. Section 54E specifically

DCIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. VOLTAS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 7029/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

depreciable asset under Section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under Section 50. Section 54E specifically

DY CIT - 8(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S VOLTAS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 94/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – 8(3)(1) V. M/S. Voltas Limited Room No. 615 Voltas House, A Block Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Rod Mumbai - 400020 Chinchpokli, Mumbai – 400033 Pan: Aaacv2809D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nitesh Joshi Department By : Shri Milind Chavan

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Milind Chavan

Section 112Section 2Section 50Section 50C

depreciable asset under Section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under Section 50. Section 54E specifically

UNIQUE PROPERTIES & SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER - CENTRAL CIRCLE 38, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 66/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Unique Properties & Securities Private Assistant Commissioner-Central Circle Limited, 4Th Floor, Malhotra House, Opp. Vs. 38, [Now Dcit Central Circle 6(3)], 19Th Gpo, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaacu0702G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Prayag Jha - ARFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari - DR

Section 143(3)Section 54E

depreciable asset under section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under section 50. Section 54E specifically

OMNIFIC ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER .21(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5388/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 48Section 49Section 50Section 50(1)Section 54E

depreciable asset under Section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under Section 50. Section 54E specifically

ACIT, CIRCLE 3(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S EUROFINANCE TRAININF & PUBLISHING PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 835/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Pitta Samuel

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 254(1)Section 48Section 50Section 54E

depreciable asset under Section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under Section 50. Section 54E specifically

ZODIAC JRD MKJ LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIR 5(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 836/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Ms. Drutika Jain, A.R. &For Respondent: Smt. Sonia Kumar, D.R

Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 2Section 234BSection 50Section 54E

depreciable asset under section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under section 50. Section 54E specifically

ITO 24(1)(5), MUMBAI vs. ENGINEERING EQUIPMENTS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 65/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.65/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Income Tax Officer 24(1)(5), बनाम/ M/S Engineering Equipment, -31, Shree Laxmi Industrial Room No.523, Vs. Estate, New Link Road, Piramal Chambers, Andheri (W), Parel, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400053 Mumbai-400012. (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. स्थधमी रेखध सं./जीआइआय सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaafe2008C

For Appellant: Shri H M Wanare

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 50Section 50ESection 54E

depreciable asset under section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under section 50. Section 54E specifically

MOHD RAZA AKBERALI GHUGHARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15(2)(3), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8111/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2005-06 Mohd Raza Akberali Ito 15(2)(3), Ghugharia, Matru Mandir Tardeo, बनाम/ M/S. N.S. Virani & Co., C.A. S Mumbai-400034 Vs. 28, Bhanushali Bldg. 35, Mint Road, Mumbai-400001 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aabpg3107B "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala. (Ar) Shri K. V. Vispure ( Dr) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 27/04/2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order: 01/07/2016

Section 143(2)Section 45Section 48Section 50Section 50CSection 54

depreciable asset under section 54E cannot be denied by referring to the fiction created under section 50. Section 54E specifically

PLUTO SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 10(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1849/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Dr. K ShivramFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, DR

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 50Section 50C

depreciation had been allowed. In other words, it was held that section 50 created a legal fiction only for a limited purpose, namely, for the purpose of sections 48 and 49 and that it cannot be extended to section 54E

RELIANCE POWER LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, ground of appeal raised by assessee is allowed

ITA 1348/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Omkareshwar Chidara(Physical Hearing) Dcit – 15(3)(1), Mumbai Reliance Power Limited Room No. 460, 4Th Floor, H-Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Vs Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Knowledge City, Koperkhairane, Mumbai – 400020] Navi Mumbai-400710 [Pan: Aaacr2365L] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Reliance Power Limited Dcit – 15(3)(1), Mumbai Room No. 460, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Reliance Centre, Ground Floor, 19 Vs Walchand Hirachand Marg, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai – 400020] [Pan: Aaacr2365L] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 50

depreciation has been availed on long-term capital asset, then, the capital gains has to be computed in the manner prescribed under section 50 and the capital gains tax will be charged as if such capital gain is arising out of short-term capital asset. In that case, the capital gains was invested in the manner prescribed in section 54E

DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 4103/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 41(1)

54E does not make any distinction between depreciable asset and non-\ndepreciable asset. A perusal of the provisions of section

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(2)(2), ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPT, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3754/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

For Appellant: \nShri Madhur Agrawal a/w Shri Bhargav ParekhFor Respondent: \nShri Biswanath Das (CIT DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 41(1)

54E does not make any distinction between depreciable asset and non-\ndepreciable asset. A perusal of the provisions of section

ITO 20(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. LEGAL HEIRS OF SHRI DURGAPRASAD AGNIHOTRI, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 698/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sunil T. Vankawala a/wFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar

Section 50Section 54E

54E but on the same analogy benefit under section 54EC shall be' available to an assessee in the case of depreciate