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 80Gclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai192Delhi142Bangalore75Chennai71Kolkata39Ahmedabad37Lucknow17Jaipur16Pune11Rajkot10Indore9Chandigarh8Hyderabad5SC3Visakhapatnam2Cochin2Jodhpur2Raipur2Surat2Telangana1Guwahati1Cuttack1Agra1Nagpur1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)18Section 12A14Section 3512Section 1112Section 143(1)10Section 143(2)10Section 14810Addition to Income9Section 36(1)(viia)6Deduction

SONAI GLOBAL FOUNDATION,SANGLI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

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

ITA 615/PUN/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2025AY 2025-26
Section 12ASection 8Section 80G

80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated\n15.01.2025. These Two Appeals were heard together and are being\ndisposed of by this common order. We treat appeal in ITA\nNo.614/PUN/2025 as \"lead case\". The Assessee in ITA\nNo.614/PUN/2025 has raised the following grounds of appeal :\n“1. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) (hereinafter referred to\nas \"the learned

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1663/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune
6
Exemption5
Penalty4
25 Aug 2025
AY 2018-19
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

depreciation in the\nfight of provisions of section 43(1) [explanation 10]. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) /\nNFAC deleted the addition and the Revenue is not in appeal before the Tribunal.\nTherefore, we are not concerned with the same.\n45.\nFurther, on perusal of return of income the Assessing Officer noted that the\nassessee had claimed deduction u/s.35

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLIGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 506/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2015-16
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

depreciation in the\nfight of provisions of section 43(1) [explanation 10]. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) /\nNFAC deleted the addition and the Revenue is not in appeal before the Tribunal.\nTherefore, we are not concerned with the same.\n45.\nFurther, on perusal of return of income the Assessing Officer noted that the\nassessee had claimed deduction u/s.35

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1660/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

depreciation in the\nfight of provisions of section 43(1) [explanation 10]. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) /\nNFAC deleted the addition and the Revenue is not in appeal before the Tribunal.\nTherefore, we are not concerned with the same.\n45.\nFurther, on perusal of return of income the Assessing Officer noted that the\nassessee had claimed deduction u/s.35

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1661/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2016-17
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

depreciation in the\nfight of provisions of section 43(1) [explanation 10]. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) /\nNFAC deleted the addition and the Revenue is not in appeal before the Tribunal.\nTherefore, we are not concerned with the same.\n45. Further, on perusal of return of income the Assessing Officer noted that the\nassessee had claimed deduction u/s.35

SHREE MAHAVEER RESEARCH FOUDATION,PUNE vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION) (HQ), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 792/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.792/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shree Mahaveer Research V The Dcit(Exemption) Foundation, S (Hq), Pune. 1183/ C/O.Vijayraj Ranka, G C Jewellers, Raviwar Peth, Pune – 411002. Maharashtra. Pan: Aadts7800B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpallil – Addl.Cit(Dr) – Virtual Hearing. Date Of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/05/2025

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 250

Section 11 of the Act. Assessee is eligible for depreciation and ld.CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the same. Submission of ld.DR : 3. Ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of Assessing Officer(AO) and ld.CIT(A). Findings & Analysis : 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed before us. In this case, Assessing Officer

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)

80G of the Act. However, in the computation of income, the assessee has disallowed only Rs.1,65,88,790/-. The Assessing Officer therefore, asked the assessee to explain as to why the differential amount of Rs.28,08,900/- should not be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. In absence of any satisfactory explanation given

DATTAKALA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,PUNE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT , I.TAX DEPT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2567/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

80G of the Act. The assessee is engaged in running various educational colleges imparting diploma and degree courses in the field engineering, management, pharmacy etc. For AY 2020-21, the assessee filed its return of income on 18.02.2021 declaring income at Rs. Nil. The return was filed after the expiry of the due date which was 15.02.2021 for the relevant

DATTAKALA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,PUNE vs. A.D.I.T, CPC, BANGALURU, BANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2459/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

80G of the Act. The assessee is engaged in running various educational colleges imparting diploma and degree courses in the field engineering, management, pharmacy etc. For AY 2020-21, the assessee filed its return of income on 18.02.2021 declaring income at Rs. Nil. The return was filed after the expiry of the due date which was 15.02.2021 for the relevant

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)

80G approval (Pg-57-58/PB-2) & claim of exemption under scrutiny assessment and withdrawing 12A registration arbitrarily on other hand. Underscoring this contradictory stance, the appellant demands this infirm action of the Revenue is fit case to be quashed and resultantly prayed for necessary direction to restore back the 12A registration with immediate effect. 8. Counter arguments & pleadings

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)

80G of the Act. However, in the computation of income, the assessee has disallowed only Rs.1,65,88,790/-. The Assessing Officer therefore, asked the assessee to explain as to why the differential amount of Rs.28,08,900/- should not be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. In absence of any satisfactory explanation given