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 54clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,800Delhi1,577Bangalore612Ahmedabad460Chennai455Kolkata304Hyderabad184Jaipur180Pune149Chandigarh148Raipur143Indore80Visakhapatnam76Surat72Amritsar62Cuttack62Cochin60Lucknow60Ranchi41Karnataka40Rajkot33SC23Jodhpur21Nagpur19Guwahati17Telangana16Dehradun13Agra11Allahabad9Patna6Panaji5Kerala5Punjab & Haryana4Calcutta3Orissa2Rajasthan2Jabalpur1Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 43B11Section 1477Section 1445Section 143(2)4Section 1484Section 2503Section 143(1)3Section 143(3)3Addition to Income3Depreciation

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
Reassessment2
Natural Justice2

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

ACIT vs. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WELFARE HUMAN RESOURCES,

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed while the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 119/PAT/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Oct 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Abhi Sarkar, AdvFor Respondent: Ld. DR. Lalita Kumari, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

54[Income escaping assessment. 55147. If the 56[Assessing] Officer 57[has reason to believe58] that any income chargea- ble to tax has escaped assessment58 for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess58 such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes

SRIRAM ENTERPRISES,PATNA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 76/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 76/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sriram Enterprises,………………………..........Appellant C/O. Nirmal & Associates, Nepali Kothi, Opposite Gasoline Petrol Pump, Boring Road, Patna-800001 [Pan:Aarfs8853J] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Patna,…………………………………..……………..Respondent, Bihar-800001 Appearances By: Shri Nishant Maitin, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 5Th March, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 8Th, 2024 O R D E R

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 263

54 of the Act to the file of Assessing Officer even though the working of allowability of deduction under section 54F is available in the order under section 263 which is not disputed by the assessee before ITAT." 14 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Sriram Enterprises 8.7. We find that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case

THE MUZAFFARPUR CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, MUZAFFARPUR

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

ITA 87/PAT/2019[12/03/2019]Status: HeardITAT Patna05 Jul 2022

Bench: Shri Mainsh Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 139Section 139(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(2)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 72

depreciation of earlier years should have been allowed to be set off against the income in view of section 32(2) of the Income Act, 1961. 14. For that the profit & loss account of the appellant reflects credit of Rs. 3,79,54

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

section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956. Thus, the assessee was required to deposit the interest due on the loans availed within the due date and that having not being done and the same appearing in the audit report in Form No. 3CD, the prima facie adjustment was rightly made which has been rightly confirmed by the Ld. Addl/JCIT

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA vs. SH. SURESH , PATNA

ITA 205/PAT/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna27 Jun 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Alok Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT D/R
Section 250Section 28Section 54Section 54F

54 to the LTCG arising to the assessee. (iii) Ld. CIT(A) erred in accepting the claim of the assessee regarding the cost of construction of the Rupam Tower building. He also erred in accepting the actual period of construction of the building.” 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in cross- objection:- “1. For that