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.

91 results for “depreciation”+ Search & Seizureclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai526Delhi442Bangalore168Chennai114Hyderabad92Pune91Jaipur88Kolkata52Chandigarh43Amritsar34Ahmedabad30Guwahati21Lucknow19Visakhapatnam16Indore14Nagpur12Cochin12Raipur12Karnataka11Cuttack11Surat10Rajkot8Allahabad6SC6Jodhpur4Telangana4Agra3Dehradun2Patna1Jabalpur1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Ranchi1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 263105Section 153A94Section 13287Section 143(3)77Section 17172Addition to Income68Section 132(4)51Section 80I49Search & Seizure48Disallowance

SHRI P.M. CHORDIA,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006-07

ITA 1026/PUN/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Mar 2019AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Aseem Sharma
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153A

depreciation claimed.” 20 25. During First Appellate proceedings, the assessee did not challenge this issue due to lack of knowledge and inadvertence. 26. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in assessment made in consequence of search and seizure

Showing 1–20 of 91 · Page 1 of 5

39
Section 133A38
Depreciation17

SHRI P.M. CHORDIA,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006-07

ITA 1025/PUN/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Mar 2019AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Aseem Sharma
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153A

depreciation claimed.” 20 25. During First Appellate proceedings, the assessee did not challenge this issue due to lack of knowledge and inadvertence. 26. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in assessment made in consequence of search and seizure

SHRI P.M. CHORDIA,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2006-07

ITA 1027/PUN/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Mar 2019AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Aseem Sharma
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153A

depreciation claimed.” 20 25. During First Appellate proceedings, the assessee did not challenge this issue due to lack of knowledge and inadvertence. 26. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in assessment made in consequence of search and seizure

DCIT CIRCLE 1 NASHIK, NASHIK vs. SHREE SAI PROPERTIES, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 987/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on the Kokani Group on 08.09.2015 and a survey was simultaneously carried out on the appellant group. During the course of search u/s 132 of the Act, certain incriminating documents pertaining to M/s Shree Sai Properties (Appellant) were seized. As per para no. 2/pages 2 and 3 of the assessment

GHATGE PATIL INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1070/PUN/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1281 To 1284/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 132Section 132(4)

search and seizure action in the absence of any independent and corroborating/incriminating material is not to be relied upon. Assessee offered the undisclosed income to the extent the corroborating evidences were seized. It is not the case of the AO that total sum of Rs.8 crores is backed up by such incriminating material. Considering the above

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. GHATGE PATIL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1281/PUN/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1281 To 1284/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 132Section 132(4)

search and seizure action in the absence of any independent and corroborating/incriminating material is not to be relied upon. Assessee offered the undisclosed income to the extent the corroborating evidences were seized. It is not the case of the AO that total sum of Rs.8 crores is backed up by such incriminating material. Considering the above

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. GHATGE PATIL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1284/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1281 To 1284/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 132Section 132(4)

search and seizure action in the absence of any independent and corroborating/incriminating material is not to be relied upon. Assessee offered the undisclosed income to the extent the corroborating evidences were seized. It is not the case of the AO that total sum of Rs.8 crores is backed up by such incriminating material. Considering the above

GHATGE PATIL INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1072/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1281 To 1284/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 132Section 132(4)

search and seizure action in the absence of any independent and corroborating/incriminating material is not to be relied upon. Assessee offered the undisclosed income to the extent the corroborating evidences were seized. It is not the case of the AO that total sum of Rs.8 crores is backed up by such incriminating material. Considering the above

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. GHATGE PATIL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1282/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1281 To 1284/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 132Section 132(4)

search and seizure action in the absence of any independent and corroborating/incriminating material is not to be relied upon. Assessee offered the undisclosed income to the extent the corroborating evidences were seized. It is not the case of the AO that total sum of Rs.8 crores is backed up by such incriminating material. Considering the above

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. GHATGE PATIL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1283/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1281 To 1284/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 132Section 132(4)

search and seizure action in the absence of any independent and corroborating/incriminating material is not to be relied upon. Assessee offered the undisclosed income to the extent the corroborating evidences were seized. It is not the case of the AO that total sum of Rs.8 crores is backed up by such incriminating material. Considering the above

GHATGE PATIL INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1071/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1281 To 1284/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 To 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 132Section 132(4)

search and seizure action in the absence of any independent and corroborating/incriminating material is not to be relied upon. Assessee offered the undisclosed income to the extent the corroborating evidences were seized. It is not the case of the AO that total sum of Rs.8 crores is backed up by such incriminating material. Considering the above

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. SAGAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1812/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Suhas Bora and Riya OswalFor Respondent: Shri S. Sadananda Singh, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 37Section 68

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year and for which a prior notice under Section 148 would be required to be issued. Section 147 does not contemplate an eventuality which Section 153A or Section 153C contemplates, the basis of which is inter alia a search action under Section 132 being resorted as noted hereinabove. Thus

VISHWA INFRAWAYS PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CENTRAL),,

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 599/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.596, 597 & 599/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Vishwa Infraways Pvt. Ltd., A-2/3, Pramukh Vihar, Naroli Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Silvasa – 396230 …. Pan: Aaccv7999Q Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nagpur आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.598/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vishwa Infraways Pvt. Ltd., A-2/3, Pramukh Vihar, Naroli Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Silvasa – 396230 …. Pan: Aaccv7999Q Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle-1, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

seizure operation, warrant was combinely executed in the case of (i) M/s. B U Bhandari Landmarks, (ii) M/s. B U Bhandari Schemes, (iii) M/s. B U Bhandari Enterprises and (iv) M/s. B U Bhandari Real Estate and the office premises of assessee was covered. During the course of search operations, cash of ₹ 3,05,080/- was found and seized

VISHWA INFRAWAYS PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CENTRAL),,

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 597/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.596, 597 & 599/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Vishwa Infraways Pvt. Ltd., A-2/3, Pramukh Vihar, Naroli Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Silvasa – 396230 …. Pan: Aaccv7999Q Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nagpur आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.598/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vishwa Infraways Pvt. Ltd., A-2/3, Pramukh Vihar, Naroli Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Silvasa – 396230 …. Pan: Aaccv7999Q Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle-1, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

seizure operation, warrant was combinely executed in the case of (i) M/s. B U Bhandari Landmarks, (ii) M/s. B U Bhandari Schemes, (iii) M/s. B U Bhandari Enterprises and (iv) M/s. B U Bhandari Real Estate and the office premises of assessee was covered. During the course of search operations, cash of ₹ 3,05,080/- was found and seized

VISHWA INFRAWAYS PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CENTRAL),,

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 596/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.596, 597 & 599/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Vishwa Infraways Pvt. Ltd., A-2/3, Pramukh Vihar, Naroli Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Silvasa – 396230 …. Pan: Aaccv7999Q Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nagpur आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.598/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vishwa Infraways Pvt. Ltd., A-2/3, Pramukh Vihar, Naroli Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Silvasa – 396230 …. Pan: Aaccv7999Q Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle-1, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

seizure operation, warrant was combinely executed in the case of (i) M/s. B U Bhandari Landmarks, (ii) M/s. B U Bhandari Schemes, (iii) M/s. B U Bhandari Enterprises and (iv) M/s. B U Bhandari Real Estate and the office premises of assessee was covered. During the course of search operations, cash of ₹ 3,05,080/- was found and seized

VISHWA INFRAWAYS PVT. LTD. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX ,,

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 598/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.596, 597 & 599/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Vishwa Infraways Pvt. Ltd., A-2/3, Pramukh Vihar, Naroli Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Silvasa – 396230 …. Pan: Aaccv7999Q Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nagpur आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.598/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vishwa Infraways Pvt. Ltd., A-2/3, Pramukh Vihar, Naroli Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Silvasa – 396230 …. Pan: Aaccv7999Q Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle-1, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

seizure operation, warrant was combinely executed in the case of (i) M/s. B U Bhandari Landmarks, (ii) M/s. B U Bhandari Schemes, (iii) M/s. B U Bhandari Enterprises and (iv) M/s. B U Bhandari Real Estate and the office premises of assessee was covered. During the course of search operations, cash of ₹ 3,05,080/- was found and seized

RAJDEEP BUILDCON PVT LTD, AHMEDNAGAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 469/PUN/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

depreciation earlier not claimed in original return of income. 17. Thus, the law is clear that for an unabated assessment year, completed assessment attains finality which cannot be disturbed except on the basis of any incriminating material unearthed during the course of search action. In other words, an assessee cannot make fresh claims in the returns filed u/s 1534, particularly

RAJDEEP BUILDCON PRIVAT LIMITED, AHMEDNAGAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 468/PUN/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

depreciation earlier not claimed in original return of income. 17. Thus, the law is clear that for an unabated assessment year, completed assessment attains finality which cannot be disturbed except on the basis of any incriminating material unearthed during the course of search action. In other words, an assessee cannot make fresh claims in the returns filed u/s 1534, particularly

RAJDEEP BUILDCOM PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 467/PUN/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

depreciation earlier not claimed in original return of income. 17. Thus, the law is clear that for an unabated assessment year, completed assessment attains finality which cannot be disturbed except on the basis of any incriminating material unearthed during the course of search action. In other words, an assessee cannot make fresh claims in the returns filed u/s 1534, particularly

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD., AURANGABAD. vs. TAPADIYA CONSTRUCTION LTD, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1375/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk, Addl.CIT
Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

seizure operations were carried out against Tapadia Group at Aurangabad, which covered the Assessee. The search lasted for four consecutive days and was concluded on 24.08.2018 at 10:45 pm. 3.2 In course of the search, a diary was seized (Annexure A, Item No. 3), which included two pages in which certain 8 ITA.No.1375/PUN./2024 (Tapadiya Construction Ltd.) details