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 31(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,757Delhi2,431Bangalore1,021Chennai809Ahmedabad695Kolkata556Hyderabad317Pune313Jaipur309Chandigarh184Raipur156Visakhapatnam124Cochin122Indore121Surat107Cuttack103Karnataka95Amritsar93Rajkot62Lucknow58Ranchi50SC45Guwahati45Nagpur37Jodhpur34Telangana23Dehradun21Kerala19Allahabad18Agra18Panaji14Patna6Calcutta4Jabalpur3Rajasthan2D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Varanasi1Tripura1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Punjab & Haryana1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 14710Section 1547Addition to Income6Section 143(3)5Disallowance5Section 143(2)2Section 250(6)2Section 7472Section 145(3)2Section 144

M/S MANISH FINLEASE (P) LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68
2
Depreciation2
Deduction2

depreciation to be allowed under sections 30 and 32. The Assessing Officer determined the taxable income making additions and disallowances. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 and reopened the assessment P a g e 10 | 71 Assessment Year : 2010 -2011 under section 147 on the basis of under assessment. The assessee objected to the reopening

I.T.O. vs. M/S KUMAR CONSTRUCLTION,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 10/PAT/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(b)Section 40A(3)

1)(a) of the 1961 Act. The Court held as under: "...If an appeal lies, section 31 of the Act describes the powers of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in such an appeal. Under section 31(3)(a) in disposing of such an appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner may, in the case of an order of assessment, confirm, reduce, enhance

DIVYA CONSTRUCTION,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 318/PAT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 143(3)Section 154

31,770/-. Thereafter the assessee moved an application under section 154 on 20.03.2015 claiming that depreciation should have been allowed by the Assessing Officer separately from the income computed by applying the net profit rate and there was a mistake apparent from record in the order of the Assessing Officer passed under section

GURUDWARA BAL LEELA MAINI SANGAT TRUST,PATNA vs. DC/AC, EXEMPTION, PATNA

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

ITA 299/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna01 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 11Section 115Section 12ASection 250Section 69Section 69A

depreciation in respect of assets which has been claimed as application under the same year or the same is not allowable in terms of Section 11 (6) of the Act notwithstanding the fact that the prescription in the said sub Section is limited to the computation of application of income for charitable purposes to the extent stated

ARUN CONSTRUCTION,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 315/PAT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 40Section 747

depreciation and other charges. The total hire charges is not taxable. The addition of Rs. 9,43,735/- on account of hire charges as sustained 1 confirmed by the learned CIT(A) is arbitrary, unjustified, void ab-initio and bad in law. The addition as sustained is fit to be deleted. 3. For that in the facts and circumstances

ARUN CONSTRUCTION,BHAGALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAGALPUR

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

ITA 314/PAT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 147Section 250(6)Section 40Section 747

depreciation and other charges. The total hire charges is not taxable. The addition of Rs. 9,43,735/- on account of hire charges as sustained 1 confirmed by the learned CIT(A) is arbitrary, unjustified, void ab-initio and bad in law. The addition as sustained is fit to be deleted. 3. For that in the facts and circumstances