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.

3 results for “depreciation”+ Section 208clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai386Delhi313Bangalore83Kolkata80Chennai71Ahmedabad64Chandigarh53Raipur39Jaipur18Hyderabad15Lucknow14Surat14Indore13Pune13Karnataka8Ranchi6Kerala5Visakhapatnam4Rajkot4SC4Telangana4Panaji3Agra3Amritsar2Rajasthan1Allahabad1Calcutta1Cochin1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Nagpur1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 143(2)3Capital Gains3Business Income3Section 143(1)2Section 14A2Short Term Capital Gains2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

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

208 Taxman 106 (Delhi). The explanation of the Authorised Representative is considered and found not acceptable for the following reasons : (i) It is seen that the assessee purchased shares of Sesa Goa Ltd. of Rs.362,32,20,410/- and sold the same for Rs.554,23,19,978/-. The purchase and sale are done within a short period. The magnitude

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

208 Taxman 106 (Delhi). The explanation of the Authorised Representative is considered and found not acceptable for the following reasons : (i) It is seen that the assessee purchased shares of Sesa Goa Ltd. of Rs.362,32,20,410/- and sold the same for Rs.554,23,19,978/-. The purchase and sale are done within a short period. The magnitude

VIJESH VITHAL TALAULICAR,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

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

ITA 230/PAN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 230/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Vijesh Vithal Talaulicar Shri Ramnath Sadan, Dr. Dada Vaidya Road, Panaji, Goa Pan : Aaxpt9647D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Panaji. ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri D.E. Robinson, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

208/- as the assessee’s share of “business income” ( net of expenses), i.e, after rejecting his claim of long 5 Vijesh Vithal Talaulicar Vs. ACIT, Circle-11, Panaji term capital gain of Rs.48,51,998/- as shown in the return of income. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(Appeals). However, the CIT(Appeals