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.

103 results for “depreciation”+ Section 14A(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,688Delhi1,057Chennai553Ahmedabad377Kolkata359Bangalore333Pune103Hyderabad79Chandigarh70Jaipur45Raipur45Amritsar44Karnataka44Ranchi41Visakhapatnam37Cochin37Indore30Cuttack22Lucknow19Guwahati17Surat12Rajkot11Jodhpur10Telangana9Panaji7Nagpur6Calcutta6Varanasi4Orissa2Agra1

Key Topics

Section 14A182Section 143(3)79Disallowance78Addition to Income72Depreciation53Section 12A36Deduction35Section 26329Section 10A27Section 35

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE -5, PUNE vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 323/PUN/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 10ASection 14ASection 35Section 35(1)

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer amounting of Rs. 9103879/- on account of guarantee fees (adjustment made by the Transfer Pricing Officer) on relying the decision of the Bombay High Court in the 2 case of Everest Kanto Cylinders

ASHOK NARAYAN BHOSALE,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE

Showing 1–20 of 103 · Page 1 of 6

24
Section 10(20)24
Section 1124

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 1501/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1501/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ashok Narayan Bhosale, The Deputy Commissioner Of Ashok Narayan Bhosle Bunglow At Vs Income Tax, Kaveri Nagar, Pratham Housing Cirlce-8, Pune. Society, Wakad, Pune – 411057. Pan: Aaspb 3588 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri S.P.Walimbe - Dr Date Of Hearing 10/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14/03/2022

Section 1Section 10Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 32

1. The learned CIT Appeals (Appeals VI), Pune has erred in law as well as in facts while confirming the order of Ld. AO Circle 8, Pune making the addition of Rs.85,47,488/-- being the additional depreciation claimed of the assessee in relation to the assets purchased by the assessee in the year FY 2011-12 after

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -11,, PUNE vs. CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED , (FORMERLY IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD.),, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1935/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 10ASection 115JSection 391Section 72ASection 74

depreciation of the amalgamating company in relation to the income under the head “Profit and gains of business or profession”. It is not a panacea for all the tax related issues of amalgamation, so as to have application insofar as the other tax entitlements, privileges or benefits in the hands of the amalgamating company, are concerned. 14. Section 74 deals

CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1857/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 10ASection 115JSection 391Section 72ASection 74

depreciation of the amalgamating company in relation to the income under the head “Profit and gains of business or profession”. It is not a panacea for all the tax related issues of amalgamation, so as to have application insofar as the other tax entitlements, privileges or benefits in the hands of the amalgamating company, are concerned. 14. Section 74 deals

ZF STEERING GEAR (INDIA) LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (1),, PUNE

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

ITA 309/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 143(3)Section 14A

section (2) of sec. 14A of the Act could be invoked only if the ld. O having regard to the accounts of the assessee, was not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of such expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

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

ITA 685/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.685/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved &For Respondent: Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, CIT
Section 14ASection 35

1 to 5 are academic in nature. 4. Ground No.6 pertains to the disallowance of expenses u/s.14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟). 5. The Assessing Officer dealt with this issue at Page-5 in Para 5 onwards in his order and has given findings at Para 5.4.1 onwards as per the detailed reasons

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. COOPER CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, SATARA

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 621/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.621/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GajrathiFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gudekar
Section 143(3)Section 35Section 35(1)(iv)

depreciation on assets, the assessee could not claim scientific research expenditure under section 35(1)(iv) of the Act on the said expenditure of ₹ 2.01 crores. However, expenses incurred on purchase of fans and motor vehicles totaling ₹ 8,09,016/- were held to be allowed under section 35(1)(iv) of the Act. The CIT(A) further directed the revenue

COPPER CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,,SATARA vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, SATARA

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 652/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.621/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GajrathiFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gudekar
Section 143(3)Section 35Section 35(1)(iv)

depreciation on assets, the assessee could not claim scientific research expenditure under section 35(1)(iv) of the Act on the said expenditure of ₹ 2.01 crores. However, expenses incurred on purchase of fans and motor vehicles totaling ₹ 8,09,016/- were held to be allowed under section 35(1)(iv) of the Act. The CIT(A) further directed the revenue

DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 342/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita. No.342/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

Section 115JSection 195(2)Section 201(1)Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

section 14A. The AO is directed to verify this claim and then accordingly compute the amount disallowable u/s.14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(iii). 41. Ground No.4 of the assessee’s appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.5,84,000/-, being, the value of lapsed ESPOs in the income computed under the normal provisions of the Act as well

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 550/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

depreciation on Windmills generating “Power for captive consumption in spite of complying the provisions of sec. 32(1)(iia). 4 Serum Institute of India Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 10. in confirming disallowance of Selling and Distribution expenses of Rs.3,64,81,120/-. 11. in confirming the action of A.O. for not directing the AO to reduce Wealth

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 549/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

depreciation on Windmills generating “Power for captive consumption in spite of complying the provisions of sec. 32(1)(iia). 4 Serum Institute of India Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 10. in confirming disallowance of Selling and Distribution expenses of Rs.3,64,81,120/-. 11. in confirming the action of A.O. for not directing the AO to reduce Wealth

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 934/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

depreciation on Windmills generating “Power for captive consumption in spite of complying the provisions of sec. 32(1)(iia). 4 Serum Institute of India Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 10. in confirming disallowance of Selling and Distribution expenses of Rs.3,64,81,120/-. 11. in confirming the action of A.O. for not directing the AO to reduce Wealth

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 607/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

depreciation on Windmills generating “Power for captive consumption in spite of complying the provisions of sec. 32(1)(iia). 4 Serum Institute of India Ltd., A.Yrs. 2011-12 and 2012-13 10. in confirming disallowance of Selling and Distribution expenses of Rs.3,64,81,120/-. 11. in confirming the action of A.O. for not directing the AO to reduce Wealth

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. LOKMANGAL AGRO INDUSTRIAL LTD,, SOLAPUR

ITA 984/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43(1)

depreciation claimed so as to attract section 43(1) Explanation 10 of the Act. Yet another decision Sasisri Extraction Ltd., vs., ACIT [2008] 122 ITD 428 (Vizag) also hold that mere credit of the subsidy amount in the assessee’s loan account does not attract sec.43(1) Explanation 10 of the Act. The Revenue fails in its identical former twin

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. LOKMANGAL AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD,, SOLAPUR

ITA 986/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43(1)

depreciation claimed so as to attract section 43(1) Explanation 10 of the Act. Yet another decision Sasisri Extraction Ltd., vs., ACIT [2008] 122 ITD 428 (Vizag) also hold that mere credit of the subsidy amount in the assessee’s loan account does not attract sec.43(1) Explanation 10 of the Act. The Revenue fails in its identical former twin

AUTOLINE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 970/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos. 970 & 2983/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Autoline Industries Limited. S. No.313-314 & 320-323, Nanewarwadi, Chakan, Pune-410501. Pan : Aabca4534D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sharad Shah &For Respondent: Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, CIT
Section 115JSection 14Section 14A

14A of the Act is to be made. We find that this issue has already been addressed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Bengal Finance and Investments (supra). For the sake of completeness, the relevant question of law raised before the Hon'ble High Court is reproduced herein below : “2. The Revenue

AUTOLINE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2983/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos. 970 & 2983/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Autoline Industries Limited. S. No.313-314 & 320-323, Nanewarwadi, Chakan, Pune-410501. Pan : Aabca4534D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sharad Shah &For Respondent: Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, CIT
Section 115JSection 14Section 14A

14A of the Act is to be made. We find that this issue has already been addressed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s. Bengal Finance and Investments (supra). For the sake of completeness, the relevant question of law raised before the Hon'ble High Court is reproduced herein below : “2. The Revenue

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

1). Therefore, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v: Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. (1992) 198 ITR 297/64 Taxman 442, the assessee could not be permitted to claim the benefit of closing favourable to the assessee. (Para 11] Therefore, in assessment proceedings under section 1534, which are for the benefit

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

1). Therefore, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v: Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. (1992) 198 ITR 297/64 Taxman 442, the assessee could not be permitted to claim the benefit of closing favourable to the assessee. (Para 11] Therefore, in assessment proceedings under section 1534, which are for the benefit

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

1). Therefore, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v: Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. (1992) 198 ITR 297/64 Taxman 442, the assessee could not be permitted to claim the benefit of closing favourable to the assessee. (Para 11] Therefore, in assessment proceedings under section 1534, which are for the benefit