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.

50 results for “depreciation”+ Section 11(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,690 Delhi4,341 Bangalore1,728 Chennai1,638 Kolkata1,012 Ahmedabad600 Hyderabad358 Jaipur329 Pune319 Karnataka257 Raipur190 Chandigarh180 Indore139 Surat136 Cochin127 Amritsar121 Visakhapatnam99 SC79 Cuttack77 Lucknow77 Rajkot72 Telangana58 Jodhpur52 Nagpur50 Ranchi41 Guwahati34 Panaji24 Patna20 Kerala20 Dehradun19 Calcutta17 Agra11 Allahabad11 Varanasi9 Orissa7 Punjab & Haryana6 Rajasthan6 Jabalpur4 Gauhati2 D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 Tripura1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)44 Addition to Income34 Disallowance31 Section 153A28 Section 1126 Section 80I26 Deduction22 Section 26319 Depreciation17 Section 143(1)

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2 (1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 337/NAG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 69A

depreciation of ` 5,57,40,754. The Assessing Officer invoking provisions of section 11(6) of the Act disallowed depreciation

Showing 1–20 of 50 · Page 1 of 3

14

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 335/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 69A

depreciation of ` 5,57,40,754. The Assessing Officer invoking provisions of section 11(6) of the Act disallowed depreciation

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 336/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 69A

depreciation of ` 5,57,40,754. The Assessing Officer invoking provisions of section 11(6) of the Act disallowed depreciation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU AJAY SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the A

ITA 32/NAG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 5Section 80I

11,21,570. The Assessing Officer concluded the assessment and the order was passed under section 143(3) of the Act on 06/03/2014, determining total income of ` 1,17,70,744. Thereafter, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 29/09/2015, which was duly served upon the assessee. The assessee filed a letter on 07/10/2015, stating that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU AJAY SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the A

ITA 30/NAG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 5Section 80I

11,21,570. The Assessing Officer concluded the assessment and the order was passed under section 143(3) of the Act on 06/03/2014, determining total income of ` 1,17,70,744. Thereafter, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 29/09/2015, which was duly served upon the assessee. The assessee filed a letter on 07/10/2015, stating that

KRUSHI VIBHAG KARMCHARI VRUND SAHAKARI PATH SANSTHA MARYADIT ,WARDHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD-1, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 182/NAG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Krushi Vibhag Karmchari Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Vrund Sahakari Pat Sanstha Wardha Maryadit Bajaj Building, Krushna Nagar, Wardha, Maharashtra – 442001 Pan: Aacak6196N Appellant Respondent

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 144Section 148Section 80Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80P

5), which stipulates that no deduction under other sections including 80P shall be allowed if the assessee fails to make such a claim in the return of income. Thus, there are twin conditions, viz., first, claiming deduction u/s 80P and second, claiming such deduction in the return of income. There is no dispute on the first condition, which has been

SHREE HINDU SMASHAN SANSTHA,AMRAVATI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 2, EXEMPTIONS, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 85/NAG/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur06 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)

depreciation is allowed in accordance with the provisions of section 11(6) of the Act. 7. As regards the addition of ` 23,32,216, on account of investment in violation of provisions of section 11(5

VASANT CO-OP SHETKARI GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY LTD.,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 29/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 29/Nag/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Vasant Co-Op. Shetkari Ginning & Pressing Factory Limited; At. Yavatmal Road, Wani, Tq. Wani, Dist. Yavatmal-440 010 Pan : Aaaat1439M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pravin Gandhi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pravin Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal Bhosale, DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54G

depreciation @5% was claimed by it. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations not being able to persuade ourselves to uphold the view taken by the Pr. CIT, i.e, as regards the entitlement of the assessee towards indexation of cost of acquisition of the property in question, i.e., land admeasuring 29,228.79 Sq. Mtrs, thus, set-aside his order

RAVINDRA MADANLAL KHANDELWAL,AKOLA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE , AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 375/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 144BSection 68

11. Regarding Smt. Savitri Thakur, it is seen that she had issued cheque payment of Rs. 14 lakhs dated 21- 7-2009 to the Appellant. Prior to the issuance of the cheques, this amount was credited into the bank account of Smt. Savitri Thakur maintained in the State Bank of India. Rae Baraeli Branch. There were three transfers

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the A

ITA 391/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur27 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

depreciation, it clearly indicates the addition is made with the prejudice and unlawful way and therefore needs to be deleted. 18. Further not withstanding anything mentioned in above para, even otherwise, if the expenses on purchase of machines are disallowed, it would ultimately result in increase in gross total income, which is completely deductible under section 80P. Thus, the deduction

VISHAL KISHORILAL JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 108/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(40)Section 68Section 69

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year and for which a prior notice under Section 148 would be required to be issued. Section 147 does not contemplate an eventuality which Section 153A or Section 153C contemplates, the basis of which is inter alia a search action under Section 132 being resorted as noted hereinabove. Thus

JEETENDRA CHANDRAKANT NAYAK,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOM TAX(OSD), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 368/NAG/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri M.G.Moryani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Singhai, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

depreciation under Section 32 of the Act. Because of this judgment, the legislature had to amend the provisions of Section 32 with effect from 1.4.1997 by using the expression “owned wholly or partly”. So the word “own” would not include a case where a residential house is partly owned by one person or partly owned by other person(s). After

ACIT ,CIRCLE (EXEMPTION ),NAGPUR , NAGPUR vs. M/S SIPNA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL ,AMRAVAI , AMRAVATI

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

ITA 223/NAG/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Acit, Vs. M/S. Sipnashikshan Prasarak Mandal Circle (Exemption), Badnera Road Amravati Amravati Pan No.:Aacts 1266 J Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shripiyushkolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shrihimeshdemble (Ca) Date Of Hearing: 26/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Department Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A)-4, Nagpur Dated 27/03/2017 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y. 2013-14 Wherein The Department Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: ShriHimeshDemble (CA)For Respondent: ShriPiyushKolhe (CIT-DR)

Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

5 donors who have confirmed giving donation (Para 9 of appellate order) by post in response to notice u/s. 133(6) of the I.T. Act. Based on these facts these donations cant be called anonymous and non genuine. Further, I find that in 30 cases apparently some field enquiries were conducted by the A.O. However, as stated above the appellant

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

depreciation debited to the profit and loss account can be excluded in terms of clause (i) of the Explanation to sub-section (2) of section 115JB of the Act read with proviso considered the object of inserting clauses (i) to (vii) of the Explanation to the said section. The Supreme Court held that the object of clause

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

depreciation debited to the profit and loss account can be excluded in terms of clause (i) of the Explanation to sub-section (2) of section 115JB of the Act read with proviso considered the object of inserting clauses (i) to (vii) of the Explanation to the said section. The Supreme Court held that the object of clause

MAYUR KHARA,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

In the result, Both the appeals of above mentioned assessee’s are allowed

ITA 64/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Mayur Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8869 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Amit Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8868 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal, Ca Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. Both These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Above Mentioned Assessees Against Two Different Orders Passed U/S 263 Of The Act By The Ld. Pr.Cit, Nagpur- 2 Dated 17-02-2017 & 16-02-20217 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Respectively. The Grounds Of Raised By The Above Mentioned Assessees Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263

5 Shri Mayur Khara vs Pr. CIT-2, Nagpur has held that in the entire revision order emphasis laid by the CIT is that in respect of four issues mentioned by him, no queries were raised by the AO. On this premise, though it is observed that there was no application of mind on the part

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 499/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

11 Smt. AanjuSaraf pronouncements as discussed above, we are of the opinion that the assessee is entitled to such enhancement. 13. With respect to eligibility of the assessee to claim deduction u/s 80IB of the Income Tax Act 1961, we find that the issue for our adjudication is now well settled as the same has been decided in favour

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 511/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

11 Smt. AanjuSaraf pronouncements as discussed above, we are of the opinion that the assessee is entitled to such enhancement. 13. With respect to eligibility of the assessee to claim deduction u/s 80IB of the Income Tax Act 1961, we find that the issue for our adjudication is now well settled as the same has been decided in favour

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 436/NAG/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

11 Smt. AanjuSaraf pronouncements as discussed above, we are of the opinion that the assessee is entitled to such enhancement. 13. With respect to eligibility of the assessee to claim deduction u/s 80IB of the Income Tax Act 1961, we find that the issue for our adjudication is now well settled as the same has been decided in favour

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 438/NAG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

11 Smt. AanjuSaraf pronouncements as discussed above, we are of the opinion that the assessee is entitled to such enhancement. 13. With respect to eligibility of the assessee to claim deduction u/s 80IB of the Income Tax Act 1961, we find that the issue for our adjudication is now well settled as the same has been decided in favour