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.

4 results for “depreciation”+ Section 2(15)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,054Delhi3,870Bangalore1,548Chennai1,404Kolkata849Ahmedabad547Hyderabad321Jaipur305Pune226Karnataka192Chandigarh168Raipur156Indore125Cochin104Amritsar90Visakhapatnam76SC73Lucknow71Surat64Rajkot50Ranchi46Telangana46Jodhpur44Cuttack34Guwahati24Nagpur23Kerala20Patna19Calcutta15Dehradun10Panaji9Allahabad8Jabalpur6Agra6Varanasi6Punjab & Haryana5Rajasthan5Orissa4Gauhati2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Tripura1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Depreciation3Section 1482Section 322Section 2632

COMNR.OF INCOME TAX vs. RKD CONSTRUCTION P.L

In the result the appeal is dismissed and the substantial question of law is

ITA/74/2011HC Orissa20 Nov 2019

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 20Th February, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …For Appellant The Court : - This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.7.2010 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘C’ Bench, Kolkata In Ita No. 583/Kol/2010 For The Assessment Year 2005-06. Heard Learned Counsel For The Appellant Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Who Had Appeared In This Appeal When The Appeal Was Admitted On 11.3.2011. Though It Is Submitted By The Learned Standing Counsel That He Does Not Have Specific Instruction To Appear, Since He Has Appeared When The Appeal Was Admitted We Directed Him To Appear In This Matter & His Appearance Shall Be Regularized By The Concerned Department. The Appeal Was Admitted On The Following Substantial Question Of Law :- I) Whether The Tribunal Committed Substantial Error Of Law In Allowing Depreciation In Terms Of Section 32 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 @ 30% By Totally Over Looking The Fact That The Rate Of Depreciation Applicable Should Be 15% As Provided In Entry No.Iii(2) Of Part-I Of Appendix I Of The Income Tax Rule, 1962?’’

Section 260ASection 263Section 32

depreciation applicable should be 15% as provided in Entry No.III(2) of Part-I of Appendix I of the Income Tax Rule, 1962?’’ 2 The assessee was an appellant before the learned Tribunal challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata dated 1.2.2010, passed under Section

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

ITA/179/2004HC Orissa10 Nov 2021

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

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

2. The appeal itself arises out of an order dated 30th April, 2004 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dismissing the Appellant-Assesee’s appeal for the Assessment Years (AYs) 1994-95 and 1995-96. The said appeals before the ITAT bearing Nos.168 and 169/CTK/2001 were in turn directed against the common order dated 3rd January

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

2. Assessee is a Private Limited Company. Under the impugned order, the Appellate Tribunal had in fact allowed the appeals of the assessee though termed it as for statistical purposes, had directed the Assessing Officer to examine the claims put forth by the assessee to reconsider the question of allowing depreciation on goodwill part of the assessee and for such

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

2) Whether the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the disallowance made by Assessing Officer on account of claim of deduction of proportionate amount of lease hold land written off of Rs.20,50,052? 3) Whether the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting