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.

24 results for “depreciation”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,449Delhi3,741Chennai1,736Bangalore1,563Kolkata1,003Ahmedabad996Pune584Hyderabad474Jaipur440Chandigarh301Karnataka259Cochin253Visakhapatnam202Raipur184Surat173Indore170Cuttack153Amritsar116Rajkot88SC80Lucknow80Guwahati65Nagpur64Telangana62Ranchi60Jodhpur49Patna34Kerala32Agra31Calcutta29Panaji24Dehradun23Allahabad21Punjab & Haryana12Jabalpur10Varanasi9Rajasthan6Orissa3Gauhati2D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Tripura1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)30Section 8028Disallowance19Addition to Income18Deduction15Section 14A13Depreciation13Section 1549Section 2507Section 10B

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, BELAGAVI vs. M/S NIRANI SUGARS LIMITED, BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 178/PAN/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji23 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kulkarni, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

deduction of depreciation as per the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 32. Since two rates of depreciation are prescribed

M/S R. S. SHETYE & BROS,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), PANAJI

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

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

7
Section 1156
Section 2636
ITA 37/PAN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. No.37/Pan/2023 (A.Y.2016-17) R.S.Shetye & Bros, Vs Acit 1(1), Flat.No.14, 1 St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, . Trionara Apartments, Edc, Patto, New Muncipal Market, Panjim Panaji- Goa-403001. Goa-403001. Pan .No.Aabfr9785N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 3

depreciation. 37. Section 32 of the Act on the other hand, allows a deduction for depreciation on tangible (buildings, furniture

BANDEKAR BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED,VASCO-DA-GAMA, GOA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI, GOA

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 38/PAN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2013-14 Bandekar Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Post Box No. 11, Suvarna Bandekar Bldg., Swatantra Path, Vasco-Da-Gama Goa-403802 Pan: Aaacb5502B . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Pramod & Mr Shriniwas Deshpande [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Mr M Satish & Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 12/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-

For Appellant: Mr Pramod & Mr Shriniwas Deshpande [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish & Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(14)Section 246ASection 250Section 253(1)Section 37(1)

depreciation. ITAT-Panaji Page 37 of 39 M/s Bandekar Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT ITA No. 038/PAN/2025 AY: 2013-14 37. Section 32 of the Act on the other hand, allows a deduction

M/S TRIMURTY INDUSTRIES,CUNCOLIM, SALCETE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, MARGAO

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 397/PAN/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji23 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury(Through Virtual Hearing) M/S. Trimurty Industry, Vs Dcit, Circle-1, Plot No. M-20, Cuncolim Margao, Goa. Industrial Estate, Cuncolim, Salcette, Goa. Pan: Aadft 1136 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nagraj Kale, Fca Revenue By : Shri N. Shrikanth, Dr Date Of Hearing : 18/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/08/2023 O R D E R Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax [Appeals]-1, Panaji, Dated 02.07.2018 For A.Y.2009-10 As Per The Grounds Of Appeal On Record.

For Appellant: Shri Nagraj Kale, FCAFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80I

depreciation and withdrawal of excess deduction claimed u/sec. 80IB. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 (1), PANAJI vs. M/S V. M. SALGAOCAR & BROTHERS (P) LTD., VASCO

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 210/PAN/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

depreciation u/s 32 of the Act is to be considered as charged & allowed for the purpose computing deduction u/s 80HHC

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 (1), PANAJI vs. M/S V. M. SALGAOCAR & BROTHERS (P) LTD., VASCO

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 209/PAN/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

depreciation u/s 32 of the Act is to be considered as charged & allowed for the purpose computing deduction u/s 80HHC

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 (1), PANAJI vs. M/S V. M. SALGAOCAR & BROTHERS (P) LTD., VASCO

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 211/PAN/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

depreciation u/s 32 of the Act is to be considered as charged & allowed for the purpose computing deduction u/s 80HHC

PEDNE TALUKA FARMERS SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,PEDNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(2), PANAJI

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

ITA 198/PAN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji23 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. No.198/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) Pende Taluka Farmers Service Vs I T O Ward2(2), Co-Operative Society Limited, Aaykar Bhavan, . Sahakar Bhawan, Edc, Patto, Pernem, Panjim Goa-403512. Goa-403001. Pan .No. Aaaap0651P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Arun .F.Naik.Ar Revenue By Shri.Guru Kumar.S.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 22.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 23.09.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of The Addl/Jcit (A)-12 Mumbai Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, The Ld.Ar Submitted That There Is A Delay Of 154 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Hon’Ble Tribunal & The Assesse Has Filed The Application & Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay. Whereas, The Facts Mentioned In The Affidavit Are Reasonable & Sufficient Cause Is Explained & The Ld. Dr Has No Specific Objections. Accordingly, Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal. The Assessee Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal

Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

deduction u/sec80P of the act and similarly made disallowance of depreciation and assessed the total income of Rs.12,64,240/- and passed

M/S SOVA,PANAJI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 24/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji10 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2018-19 M/S Sova Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Panaji, Goa-403001. Pan: Aacfs8862Q . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: Mr Sukhsagar Syal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M Satish [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 263Section 56

depreciation of ₹3,21,300/- were ₹27,38,53,538/-. The return of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dt. 22/09/2019 and the consequential assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed wherein; (i) in the absence of business operation all expenditure incurred & claimed as deductible

M/S TERACOM (P) LTD,PONDA vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 2, PANAJI

In the result, the Stay applications filed by the assessee are infactious and are dismissed, and the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3/PAN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos. 2/Pan/2025 & S A.2/Pan/2025 I T A. Nos. 3/Pan/2025 & S A.3/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2010-11 & A.Y.2011-12 ) Teracom Ltd, Vs Jcit-Range-2, 55,1 St Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Patto, . Ponda Commerce Center Panaji, Ponda-403401, Goa-403001. Goa. . Pan .No. Aabct5254B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Rama Rivonkar.Ar Revenue By Shri.Capt Pradeep Arya.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 02.07.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 03.07.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assesse Against The Separate Orders Of The Nfac Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. 2. Since The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Common & Similar, Hence They Are Clubbed, Heard & A Consolidated Order Is Passed. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Up Ita No.2/Pan/2025, A.Y 2010-11 As Lead Case & Facts Narrated. The Assessee Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A)

depreciation on revaluation of assets in computing book profits u/sec115JB of the Act(ii)disallowance u/sec14A of the Act (iii)excess claim of deduction

M/S TERACOM (P) LTD,PONDA vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 2, PANAJI

In the result, the Stay applications filed by the assessee are infactious and are dismissed, and the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2/PAN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos. 2/Pan/2025 & S A.2/Pan/2025 I T A. Nos. 3/Pan/2025 & S A.3/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2010-11 & A.Y.2011-12 ) Teracom Ltd, Vs Jcit-Range-2, 55,1 St Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Patto, . Ponda Commerce Center Panaji, Ponda-403401, Goa-403001. Goa. . Pan .No. Aabct5254B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Rama Rivonkar.Ar Revenue By Shri.Capt Pradeep Arya.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 02.07.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 03.07.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assesse Against The Separate Orders Of The Nfac Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. 2. Since The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Common & Similar, Hence They Are Clubbed, Heard & A Consolidated Order Is Passed. For The Sake Of Convenience, We Shall Take Up Ita No.2/Pan/2025, A.Y 2010-11 As Lead Case & Facts Narrated. The Assessee Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A)

depreciation on revaluation of assets in computing book profits u/sec115JB of the Act(ii)disallowance u/sec14A of the Act (iii)excess claim of deduction

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI vs. SHIFFER AND MENEZES INDIA PVT. LTD, PANAJI

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 232/PAN/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji02 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2009-10 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Schiffer & Menezes Income Tax, Circle-1(1), India (P) Ltd. Vs. Panaji, Goa Cmm Building, Rua De Ourem, Panaji, Goa (Pan: Aaccm0106E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri P. R. V. Raghavan, Ca Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-2, Panaji Vide

For Appellant: Shri P. R. V. Raghavan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 72Section 80ASection 80A(1)Section 80B(5)Section 80C

depreciation of Rs.2,00,58,145/- as claimed in the return by the assessee. 3. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate the facts stated by the AO in the assessment order that under I.T. Act, 1961 any deduction

DEMPO INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,PANAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(2), PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED in above terms

ITA 131/PAN/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing At Pune) आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 131/Pan/2019 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dempo Industries Pvt. Ltd., Dempo House, Campal, Panaji, Goa - 403001 Pan: Aaacu1745F . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Ms Rucha VaidyaFor Respondent: Mr Prabhakar Anand DJ
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 246A(1)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 263Section 32(1)(iia)

deduction under clause (ii) : (Emphasis supplied) A bare reading clause (iia) of section 32(1) unambiguously prescribes that new plant or machinery acquired and installed after 31st March, 2005 subject to 2nd proviso are eligible for additional depreciation

M/S CHOWGULE AND COMPANY (SALT) PVT. LTD,MORMUGAO vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, MARGAO

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of aforesaid observation

ITA 390/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. : 390/Pan/2017 करधििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/S Chowgule & Company (Salt) Pvt Ltd., Chowgule House, Mormugao Harbour, Goa – 403803. Pan: Aabcc 5595 J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Ms Hiral Sejpal Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull Am; The Present Appeal Filed By The Appellant Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax- Appeals, Panaji-1 [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 09/10/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Tousled Out Of Order Of Assessment Of Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-Circle-2, Margoa [For Short “Ao”] Dt. 27/07/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2012-2013. Itat-Panaji Page 1 Of 23

For Appellant: Ms Hiral SejpalFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 10(35)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 250

depreciation @80% on diesel generation treating as “energy saving device” and leave encashment ITAT-Panaji Page 7 of 23 M/s Chowgule and Company (Salt) Pvt Ltd ITA No.: 390/PAN/2017, AY : 2012-2013, AABCC5595J treating as ascertained liability eligible for deduction

PARKKOT MARITIME AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED.,GOA vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MARGAO RANGE, MARGAO

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 182/PAN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.V.Shivrama Iyer, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr.DR
Section 5Section 80

deduction of 30% of profits for the next five years. These companies have the choice of availing such benefits in any ten consecutive years out of initial twelve years from the year in which these commence operation. Keeping in view the capital intensive nature and higher allowances of depreciation

PARKKOT MARITIME AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED.,GOA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, MARGAO., MARGAO

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 181/PAN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.V.Shivrama Iyer, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr.DR
Section 5Section 80

deduction of 30% of profits for the next five years. These companies have the choice of availing such benefits in any ten consecutive years out of initial twelve years from the year in which these commence operation. Keeping in view the capital intensive nature and higher allowances of depreciation

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. M/S SOCIADADE DE FOMENTO INDUSTRIAL P. LTD, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 116/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

depreciation etc and portion of said expenses will be attributable to maintenance of the investment portfolio and to the earning of the exempt income as rightly concluded by the A.O. Thus the disallowance by invoking Rule 8D is justified and is in accordance with the Bombay High Court decision in the case of M/s. Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing

SOCIEADADE DE FOMENTO INDL. PVT. LTD.,MARGAO vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MARGAO RANGE, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 105/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

depreciation etc and portion of said expenses will be attributable to maintenance of the investment portfolio and to the earning of the exempt income as rightly concluded by the A.O. Thus the disallowance by invoking Rule 8D is justified and is in accordance with the Bombay High Court decision in the case of M/s. Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing

VGM EXPORT,VASCO vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MARGAO

ITA 114/PAN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji25 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 114/Pan/2023 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vgm Export Suvarn Bandekar Building, Swatantra Path, Vasco, Goa Pan : Aaafv6197P . . . . . . . Applicant V/S Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Margao Range, Margao. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr P B Deshpande [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 25/02/2025

For Appellant: Mr P B Deshpande [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 40

deduction. The rival parties are also in complete agreement that, neither section 43AA nor ICDS-VI can be made applicable to the present case. The sole dispute hinges around nature of forex fluctuation loss as to ‘notional or real’ & ‘capital or revenue’. The Revenue setup it’s disallowance on twofold reasoning viz; (a) the forex fluctuation loss is notional

BARDC BANK,BHATKAL vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 294/PAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji19 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.294/Pan/2024 (A.Y. 2013-14) Bardc Bank Bhatkal, Vs National E – Pld Bank, Main Road, Assessment Centre . Uttara Kannada, Delhi-110001 Bhatkal S.O. Karnataka-581320. Pan .No. Aaaap1731G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147

deduction u/sec80P of the act which cannot be disputed. The assesse has also complied with the scrutiny guidelines in submitting the information and subsequently the A.O. has passed the order u/s 143(3) of the Act on19-12-2015.We considered it appropriate to refer to the provisions of Sec. 147 of the Act and the first proviso which is read as under