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 36clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,171Delhi2,040Bangalore845Chennai687Ahmedabad400Kolkata346Jaipur204Hyderabad186Raipur139Chandigarh126Pune106Amritsar63Indore62Visakhapatnam49Lucknow45Surat44Rajkot43SC42Cochin41Ranchi37Karnataka27Jodhpur26Kerala21Cuttack21Guwahati21Nagpur19Dehradun8Calcutta7Telangana6Patna6Varanasi6Rajasthan5Agra5Punjab & Haryana4Allahabad3Panaji3Jabalpur2D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Tripura1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 80I14Section 43B11Section 2504Addition to Income4Section 143(2)3Depreciation3Section 1472Section 1482Section 143(3)2Disallowance

ARYAN FLAVOURS,NOIDA vs. DC/AC CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 369/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Ita No. 369 /Pat/2025 ( Asstt. Year: 2018-19) Aryan Flavours Vs Dc/Ac Circle-1, Patna B-8, Sector-6, Noida, Gautam Muzaffarpur, Muzaffarpur, Bihar Buddha Nagar, Noida, Noida, Up- 201301 Patna. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabfa3538J Assessee By : Sh. Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit. Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2026 Order Per Rajesh Kumar, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT
Section 30Section 36Section 37(1)

depreciation @ 10% on the said expenditure. 3. In the appellate proceedings, the learned CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on this issue by noting that the said expenditure was not allowable under the provisions of section 37(1) which expressly excluded the expenditure which is not in the nature as described in section 30 to section 36

2
Deduction2

MASUDAN TANTI,BHAGALPUR vs. CIT, NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 29/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bedi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Lalita Kumari, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44

36 read as under: “1. The Learned CIT(A) has also passed the order in ad hoc manner without going in details of our submission. The Learned ACIT (NFAC) has been pleased to complete the Assessment on u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 by making addition of Rs.1,06,23,768/- mere conjecturers & Surmises. The Appellant is seriously aggrieved with the order

MAHUA COOPERATIVE COLD STORAGE LTD, MAHUA,VAISHALI vs. ADIT,CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

ITA 520/PAT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 43BSection 4A

depreciation of Rs. 44,65,970/- which should have been allowed against the income determined. 8) For that other grounds, if any, will be urged at the time of hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an AOP and had filed its return of income on 20.02.2022 showing total loss

ARUN KUMAR GUPTA,SIWAN vs. DC/AC, CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 30/PAT/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Patna10 Oct 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)

depreciation. 3. This appeal was listed on the Board on 18.04.2023. Thereafter it has been adjourned on nine occasions. Every time fresh notice was issued and efforts were made to inform the assessee on the telephone number given in Form 36. But no one has come present and, therefore, under compelling circumstances, the hearing was concluded ex-parte

RAKESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13

ITA 85/PAT/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos.85 & 86/Pat/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80I

Depreciation for the year Electricals & equipments 17,013 2,552 Furniture & fixture 44,742 4,474 Tools & equipments 91,252 13,263 Computer 24,604 (new) 14,762 Printer 5,000 (new) 840 From above chart, it is evident that to manufacture/produce ultrasonography and X-ray machines which resulted In sale of Rs.5,10,49,366/- & net profit of Rs.2

RAKESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13

ITA 86/PAT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos.85 & 86/Pat/2017 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80I

Depreciation for the year Electricals & equipments 17,013 2,552 Furniture & fixture 44,742 4,474 Tools & equipments 91,252 13,263 Computer 24,604 (new) 14,762 Printer 5,000 (new) 840 From above chart, it is evident that to manufacture/produce ultrasonography and X-ray machines which resulted In sale of Rs.5,10,49,366/- & net profit of Rs.2