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.

328 results for “disallowance”+ Depreciationclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,657Delhi4,049Chennai1,744Bangalore1,584Kolkata918Ahmedabad637Pune328Hyderabad326Jaipur302Raipur154Chandigarh141Cochin129Indore107Amritsar99Lucknow81Surat79Visakhapatnam78Rajkot64Karnataka62Ranchi57Nagpur53Jodhpur51SC44Kerala33Cuttack30Guwahati25Panaji23Patna20Dehradun18Calcutta15Agra13Punjab & Haryana9Jabalpur8Allahabad7Orissa7Rajasthan7Varanasi7Telangana6Tripura1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income72Disallowance66Depreciation56Section 143(3)47Section 14A46Deduction43Section 143(1)40Section 143(2)34Section 26331Section 11

GHODAWAT SKYSTAR LLP (FORMERLY GHODAWAT CONSUMER PRODUCTS LLP),KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, KOLHAPUR

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

ITA 1400/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Pune09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19 Ghodawat Skystar Llp Dcit, Circle – 1, Kolhapur (Formerly Ghodawat Consumer Products Llp) Vs. Plot No.438, Ap Chipri Via Jaysingpur Shirol, Kolhapur – 416101 Pan: Aamfg7028C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B S Rajpurohit Department By : Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 08-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-12-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri B S RajpurohitFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

disallowance of depreciation of Rs.1,00,05,726/- made by the Assessing Officer and Rs.1,68,60,314/- disallowed by the Assessing

Showing 1–20 of 328 · Page 1 of 17

...
28
Section 80I27
Section 12A27

APPASAHEB NALAWADE GADHINGLAJ SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD.,KOLHAPUR vs. DC/ACIT CIRCLE-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

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

ITA 2524/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 May 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha
Section 143(3)Section 32

disallowance of depreciation was made by the Assessing Officer. The disallowance of depreciation was deleted by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

ITA 896/PUN/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: (Assessment Year: 2000-01)
Section 1

disallowed the claim for depreciation on coolers. It is important to note here, that the claim for depreciation on coolers

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. COCA-COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

ITA 356/PUN/2007[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: (Assessment Year: 2000-01)
Section 1

disallowed the claim for depreciation on coolers. It is important to note here, that the claim for depreciation on coolers

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. COCA-COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

ITA 1015/PUN/2004[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: (Assessment Year: 2000-01)
Section 1

disallowed the claim for depreciation on coolers. It is important to note here, that the claim for depreciation on coolers

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. COCA-COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

ITA 357/PUN/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: (Assessment Year: 2000-01)
Section 1

disallowed the claim for depreciation on coolers. It is important to note here, that the claim for depreciation on coolers

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE vs. COCA COLA INDIA PVT.LTD,, PUNE

ITA 1162/PUN/2005[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: (Assessment Year: 2000-01)
Section 1

disallowed the claim for depreciation on coolers. It is important to note here, that the claim for depreciation on coolers

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

ITA 610/PUN/2004[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: (Assessment Year: 2000-01)
Section 1

disallowed the claim for depreciation on coolers. It is important to note here, that the claim for depreciation on coolers

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

ITA 256/PUN/2007[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: (Assessment Year: 2000-01)
Section 1

disallowed the claim for depreciation on coolers. It is important to note here, that the claim for depreciation on coolers

ADDL.CIT RANGE-1, PUNE, PUNE vs. COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

ITA 825/PUN/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: (Assessment Year: 2000-01)
Section 1

disallowed the claim for depreciation on coolers. It is important to note here, that the claim for depreciation on coolers

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

ITA 144/PUN/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: (Assessment Year: 2000-01)
Section 1

disallowed the claim for depreciation on coolers. It is important to note here, that the claim for depreciation on coolers

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

ITA 1103/PUN/2005[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: (Assessment Year: 2000-01)
Section 1

disallowed the claim for depreciation on coolers. It is important to note here, that the claim for depreciation on coolers

NALCO WATER INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -2, , PUNE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1892/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Assessment Year:2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Shivaji B. More
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C(3)

disallowing depreciation of INR 1,75,34,827 on the assets installed at the premises of the Appellant's customers

SEHGAL AUTORIDERS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 10,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 162/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Pune25 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.162/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sehgal Autoriders Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle- 10, D-Ii, 64/6, Midc Telco Road, Pune. Chinchwad, Pune- 411019. Pan : Aafcs2240A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Rishi V. Lodha Revenue By : Shri S. P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing 25.01.2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 25.01.2022 : आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 6, Pune [‘Cit(A)’ For Short] Dated 08.11.2017 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Hon. Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Appeals), Pune-6 Erred In Disallowing The Depreciation Claimed For The Cars Used By The Directors For Official Work Of The Company But Ownership Documents In The Name Of Individual Director. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstance Of The Case The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Appeals), Pune-6 Erred In Disallowing The Interest Paid On The Purchase Of Cars.

For Appellant: Shri Rishi V. LodhaFor Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe
Section 143(3)

Disallowance of depreciation of vehicle of Rs.4,57,557/-. (iii) Disallowance of interest on purchase of car of Rs.53,761/-. 3 4. One of the disallowance

REXEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

ITA 981/PUN/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 May 2025
Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)

Disallowance of depreciation on goodwill arising pursuant\nto amalgamation of Yantra Automation Private Limited ('YAPL')\nand AD Electronics Private Limited

INTERVALVE POONAWALLA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 636/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14 Intervalve Poonawalla Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle 1(1), Fin Div. 16/B-1, Sarosh Bhavan, Pune Vs. 2Nd Floor, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Opp. Niv, Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaaci3917P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak & Vishnu Bhutada Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 14-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-05-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance of 1/7th depreciation on helicopter without appreciating that the disallowance made was on an estimated basis and hence, no penalty

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYKAR BHAWAN, KOLHAPUR, MAHARASHTRA vs. KOLHAPUR ZILLA SAHAKARI DUDH UTPADAK SANGH LIMITED, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1236/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1236/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Assistant Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Commissioner Of Income V Dudhutpadak Sangh Limited, Tax, S B-1, Midc, Gokul Shirgaon, Kolhapur. Kolhapur – 416234. Pan: Aaaak0230D Appellant / Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Sandeep P. Sathe – Dr Date Of Hearing 10/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 25/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Emanating From The Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 30.12.2019.The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Cit(A) Erred In Allowing Rs.5,62,220/- On Account Of Fixed Assets On Which Project Subsidy Was Received From National Dairy Development Board As The Department Has Contested The Issue Before The Supreme Court. Kolhapur Zilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Limited [R]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation disallowance of Rs.67,73,998/- as follows :- “11. Ground no. 3 in appeal is against the disallowance of additional

SAHYADRI KARAD HOSPITALS PRIVATE LIMITED ,PUNE vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 5, PUNE , PUNE

ITA 563/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 143(1)Section 32(2)Section 72Section 72(3)

depreciation amounting to Rs.27,87,10,127/-, as disallowed in both the lower proceedings. 3 ITA.Nos.562 & 563/PUN./2024 4. We note

SAHYADRI KARAD HOSPITALS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 5, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 562/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 143(1)Section 32(2)Section 72Section 72(3)

depreciation amounting to Rs.27,87,10,127/-, as disallowed in both the lower proceedings. 3 ITA.Nos.562 & 563/PUN./2024 4. We note

PUSPAK STEEL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 852/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2023AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 143(3)Section 14A

disallowance made of Rs. 2,79,725/- made on account of depreciation on cars is not in accordance with the provisions