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.

11 results for “depreciation”+ Section 36(1)(via)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai293Delhi221Chennai118Bangalore111Jaipur52Chandigarh50Hyderabad37Kolkata33Ahmedabad32Surat30Indore16Cuttack14Pune11Jodhpur7Cochin5Lucknow5Guwahati5SC4Rajkot3Dehradun3Visakhapatnam2Nagpur2Karnataka2Allahabad2Telangana2Varanasi2Patna1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)16Section 36(1)(viia)12Section 5710Section 2639Section 143(2)8Section 12A6Addition to Income6Section 143(1)5Deduction5Disallowance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NANDED, NANDED vs. LATUR DISTRICT CENTRAL CO OP BANK LTD, LATUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1222/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)

via)\nof the Act. Further, as the appellant is obligated to make provision in respect\nof the non-performing assets as per the Reserve Bank of India guidelines, it\nmay not be mandatory or rather it would be redundant for the appellant to\nmake provision for bad and doubtful debts, separately Given the banking\nnorms prescribed by the RBI under

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLHPAUR vs. RBL BANK LTD, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

5
Section 104
ITA 657/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: Disposed
ITAT Pune
30 Sept 2024
AY 2014-15

Bench: SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

1 )(vii) and not hit by Section 36(l)(via) at all. 47. Detailed arguments on the allowability of the claim has been made by the assessee before the AO and the CIT(A). The order clearly notes the interpretation advanced by the assessee. No factual inaccuracies have been pointed out the lower authorities. It is mere case

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA, PUNE

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

ITA 428/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jan 2025AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)

via) that the provision should relate to rural advances.\n2. 3. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact the entire provision made has to be considered and not the provision relating to rural advances only be considered.\n2. 4. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA ,PUNE vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 259/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S Ananthan & Smt. Abarna CAFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)

via) that the provision should relate to rural advances. 2.3. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact the entire provision made has to be considered and not the provision relating to rural advances only be considered. 2.4. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Catholic Syrian

ASHISH NIRANJAN SHAH,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -4,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 697/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.697/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ashish Niranjan Shah, The Pr.Cit-4, Pune. 39, Mantri Court, Dr.Ambedkar V Road, Next To Rto, Sangam, S Pune – 411001. Pan: Aidps 7682 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Keyur Patel, Irs – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 28/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13/10/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Pune Dated26.03.2019 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Learned Pr. Cit- 4, Pune Erred In Law & On Facts In Treating The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Being Erroneous & Thereby Prejudicial To The Revenue U/S 263 Without Appreciating That, The Learned Ao Has Allowed Appellant'S Claim Of Business Loss Amounting To Rs.10,20,14,068/- Incurred On Account Of Default In Payment By Nsel, With Due Application Of Mind & Verification. The Learned Pr. Cit Erred In Holding That, Ao Has Not Carried Out Any Enquiry With Respect To Business Loss Claimed By The Appellant & Not Applied His Ashish Niranjan Shah [A]

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43(5)

section 142 which has been filed by the assessee at Page 53, 57 of Paper Book(PB). 5.3 The ld.AO vide notice dt.15.08.2016 raised these questions before the assessee : 12 Ashish Niranjan Shah [A] “1. Detailed note on business/profession activities carried out by you during the year under consideration. 2. Please furnish copy of ITR, computation and audit report along

ASHWINI SAHAKARI RUNGNALAYA & RESEARCH CENTER,,SOLAPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS),, PUNE

ITA 714/PUN/2018[N.A]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Mar 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 714/Pun/2018 Ashwini Sahakari Rugnalaya & Research Centre 7107/1, Plot No. 180, North Sadar Bazar, Solapur-413003. Pan: Aaaja0041K . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Keyur Patel [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 10Section 10(23)Section 11Section 12ASection 22Section 253(1)(c)

via) to the assessee. This decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was, thus, not before the ITAT at the relevant time when the impugned order was passed. 5. In light of this subsequent development, we are of the view that the appeal of the assessee before the ITAT i.e., ITA No.714/PUN/2018, should be remanded for de novo consideration

JAIBHAGWAN BANARASIDAS JINDAL,JALNA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2016/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

depreciation allowance or any other allowance has been computed under the provisions of the Act. The very fact that reasons are recorded and notice u/s 148 11 was issued goes to show that the AO had applied his mind and was satisfied himself about the re-opening of the case. The IT Act envisages that the AO should only have

ANIL SHIVAJI JADHAV,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RATNAGIRI

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

ITA 2266/PUN/2024[AY 2011-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2266/Pun/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Anil Shivaji Jadhav Vs Ito, Ward 1 H.No. 325 Ghanekunt, Ratnagiri Lote, Khed, Ratnagiri- 415722 Maharashtra Pan-Acupj8781B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhivare
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 24Section 250

VIA of Rs. 1,00,000/- c. Deduction under Section 24(b) of Rs. 36,413/- being interest on housing loan. d. Interest on cc, Interest on Loan e.15% of the total salary (Le. Wages and Bonus) debited by the appellant to his Profit and Loss Account on an adhoc basis. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter

M/S GIRIRAJ ENTERPRISES,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 427/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 10(35)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

36,665 Wind 8 Ranebenuur (KT) 10.50 2012-13 2014-15 7,01,18,775 Wind MW 9 Vaspeth I (MS) 10MW 2011-12 2014-15 7,49,25,347 Wind 10 Bhendewadi II (MS) 10 2014-15 2017-18 2,71,79,414 Wind MW 11 GS Wadi

SHAHU SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, LATUR,LATUR vs. ACIT (EXMP.) CIRCLE, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 951/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jan 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 10Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 57

via) are required to\nobtain the approval of CCIT / PCIT. The trust is running schools which\nare mostly granted by Government in the year between 1990-2000.\nCertificates from School Education Department, Government of\nMaharashtra confirming the amount of grants distributed to schools\nrun by trust is enclosed herewith as Annexure \"E\".\n2) Perusal of the Pay sheets as claimed

M/S PERSISTENT SYSTEMS LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 692/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.692/Pun/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S.Persistent Systems Assessment Unit, Income Limited, V Tax Department. “Bhageerath” 402, Senapati S Bapat Road, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aabcp 1209 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Dhanesh Bafna& Shriaditya Vaidya– Ar’S Revenue By Shri Suhas Kulkarni - Irs Addl Commissioner Of Income Tax Date Of Hearing 26/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02/11/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order, Dated 20.07.2022 Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Ground 1: Order Is Invalid / Non Est  On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Unit (‘Au’) Has Erred In Passing The Draft Assessment M/S.Persistent Systems Limited [A]

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(11)Section 144(7)Section 144BSection 144C(6)(C)

via video conference and without providing an opportunity to the Appellant to file a written submission in response to the Show-cause notice. Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Ld. DRP’) erred in upholding the same by contending that there was no denial of opportunity to the appellant.  Further, the Ld. DRP erred in not providing an opportunity to the appellant to provide