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.

6 results for “depreciation”+ Section 11(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,690Delhi4,330Bangalore1,724Chennai1,633Kolkata1,007Ahmedabad599Hyderabad356Jaipur326Pune296Karnataka241Chandigarh180Raipur165Indore139Surat136Cochin125Amritsar119Visakhapatnam89SC79Cuttack77Lucknow77Rajkot71Telangana58Jodhpur52Nagpur50Ranchi38Guwahati34Kerala20Patna19Dehradun19Calcutta16Panaji16Agra11Allahabad10Varanasi8Orissa6Punjab & Haryana6Rajasthan6Jabalpur4Gauhati2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Tripura1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Depreciation4Section 2603Section 14A3Addition to Income3Section 45(2)2Section 143(3)2Section 1482Deduction2Disallowance2

NALCO vs. COMNR.OF INCOME TAX

ITA/133/2012HC Orissa09 May 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 16Th January, 2024 Appearance : Sri Vipul Kundalia, Adv. Smt. Oindrilla Ghosal, Adv. ...For The Appellant. Sri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Sri Sanjoy Bhaumik, Adv. Smt. Swapna Das, Adv. ...For The Respondent. 1. Heard Sri Vipul Kundalia, Learned Senior Standing Counsel For The Appellant/Revenue & Sri J.P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Sanjoy Bhaumik & Smt. Swapna Das, Learned Advocates For The Respondent/Assessee. 2. This Appeal Was Admitted By This Court By An Order Dated 30.11.2012 On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law: “1) Whether In View Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Instant Case The Tribunal Erred By Not Considering That Subsides Which May Be Used Freely

Section 43(6)Section 89

depreciable fixed assets chargeable of tax on the basis that the accounting treatment cannot effect the operation of the statutory provisions contained in Section 43(6) of the said Act and for the purpose of income tax the block of assets concept was followed as per the statutory provisions?” Substantial Question of Law No.1 3. So far as the afore

INDUSTRIAL INCUBATOR vs. DY.COMMNR.OF I.T.

ITA/179/2004
HC Orissa
10 Nov 2021

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

Section 148 of the IT Act, the AO inter alia held that the claim for 100% on aerators, marine water pumps and motors was not justified. 6. The Assessee during the assessment proceedings disclosed that the name of the supply of the aerators, and the notice issued to the suppliers by the AO. The said supplier in its reply

COMNR.OF INCOME TAX vs. NEELACHAL ISPAT NIGA

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/119/2013HC Orissa21 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 260

6 coming within the puview of the revisional jurisdiction of the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). 10. Mr. Nageshwar Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant places strong reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX –vs- SMIFS SECURITIES LTD rendered on 22nd

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,BHUBANESWAR vs. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF ORISSA LTD.

In the result, the appeal stands disposed of in terms of

ITA/33/2017HC Orissa14 Nov 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Section 115Section 115JSection 14Section 14ASection 260Section 45(2)

6. In view of the ruling of the co-ordinate bench as aforesaid, following the law enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex 8 Court in the case of Walfort Share and Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. as well as Maxop Investments Ltd., we have no reasons to differ from the same. Accordingly, the first substantial question of law is answered

ISPAT ALLOYS LTD. vs. DY.COMMNR.OF I.T.

The appeal is allowed in the above terms with no

ITA/14/2003HC Orissa10 Nov 2021

Bench: The Assessing Officer (Ao) & Claimed Depreciation Allowance On The Increased Cost Of The Plant & Machinery Due To Exchange Fluctuations. The Ao In The Assessment Order Dated 31St March 1997 Rejected The Above Claim.

Section 43Section 43A

6. This Court has heard the submissions of Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant-Assessee and Mr. R. Chimanka, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Department. 7. The impugned order of the ITAT fails to discuss any of the decisions referred to by the CIT (A) in its order. Its conclusion that the actual cost

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.NEELACHAL ISPAT NIGAM LTD.

In the result, this Income Tax Appeal is allowed, setting

ITA/11/2018HC Orissa16 Mar 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 143(3)

Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. 3. The appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals. 4. The first appellate authority, after a detailed discussion of the relevant provisions, as well as the ITA NO. 11 OF 2018 -4- adjustment of various Rules and Tribunals, allowed the Appeal in part. 5. As per the said order