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.

10 results for “depreciation”+ Section 271clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,155Mumbai1,131Ahmedabad202Bangalore191Chennai162Kolkata107Jaipur81Hyderabad54Raipur53Pune52Surat46Indore44Chandigarh43Lucknow26Amritsar16Visakhapatnam12SC11Dehradun10Nagpur10Rajkot10Guwahati8Jodhpur8Karnataka7Telangana6Patna5Cuttack5Ranchi5Allahabad4Varanasi4Panaji4Jabalpur3Cochin3Agra3D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1S. B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)23Section 80I18Section 14712Section 153A12Disallowance7Deduction7Section 271(1)(c)5Addition to Income4Section 36(1)(viia)2Section 54F

DCIT CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR vs. M/S TRISTER RETAIL CONCEPTS PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, department’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 319/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c) and hence it is a fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c). Further on perusal of profit & Loss account assessee has claimed loss on Sale of Fixed Assets of Rs.4,02,50,000/- which resulted in loss of Rs.4,20,81,645/-. During the course of assessment proceedings by issuing show cause notice

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

2
Section 234A2

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

271/- Venkatesh Krupa Enclave, Panjri, Nagpur Shri Jeetendra Chandrakant Nayak vs. ACIT (OSD) ITA no. 368/Nag./2023 3 11 & 12, Shree Yes Let Out (-) Rs.50,471/- Venkatesh Krupa Enclave, Panjri, Nagpur From the above table, it is seen that the assessee has already owner of three residential houses, other than the aforesaid new assets on the date transfer

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 498/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

depreciation is covered by the Co–ordinate Bench decision rendered in assessee’s own case ITA no.114/Nag./2009 (AY 2004-05) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High court assessee’s sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas (supra) wherein the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The facts

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

depreciation is covered by the Co–ordinate Bench decision rendered in assessee’s own case ITA no.114/Nag./2009 (AY 2004-05) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High court assessee’s sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas (supra) wherein the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The facts

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

depreciation is covered by the Co–ordinate Bench decision rendered in assessee’s own case ITA no.114/Nag./2009 (AY 2004-05) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High court assessee’s sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas (supra) wherein the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The facts

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

depreciation is covered by the Co–ordinate Bench decision rendered in assessee’s own case ITA no.114/Nag./2009 (AY 2004-05) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High court assessee’s sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas (supra) wherein the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The facts

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 512/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

depreciation is covered by the Co–ordinate Bench decision rendered in assessee’s own case ITA no.114/Nag./2009 (AY 2004-05) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High court assessee’s sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas (supra) wherein the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The facts

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

depreciation is covered by the Co–ordinate Bench decision rendered in assessee’s own case ITA no.114/Nag./2009 (AY 2004-05) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High court assessee’s sister concern’s case in M/s. R.B. Seth, Shriram Narsingdas (supra) wherein the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The facts

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)

271(1)(C) being premature is not being adjudicated. 17. As a result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed.’’ 2.3 During the course of hearing, the ld. DR strongly relied on the order of the AO 2.4 On the other hand, the ld. AR of the assessee relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) and filed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AKOLA CIRCLE , AKOLA vs. AKOLA URBAN CO-OPRATIVE BANK LTD , AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 119/NAG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi a/wFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

depreciation for current year as well as preceding year. The assessee filed its revised return on 01/10/2015, claiming TDS which remained to be claimed in original return of income. There were no changes in income insofar as other claims are concerned. The case was selected for Scrutiny under CASS. The Assessing Officer concluded by passing order dated 27/12/2017, under section