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.

4 results for “reassessment”+ Section 32(1)(iia)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai52Delhi32Raipur31Jaipur23Bangalore21Chennai17Ahmedabad15Indore10Kolkata8Cuttack6Guwahati5Cochin5Pune4Visakhapatnam3Surat3Lucknow2Chandigarh2Hyderabad2Telangana1Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 32(1)(iia)15Section 80H9Depreciation4Addition to Income4Section 143(3)3Deduction3Section 1482

AYOKI FABRICON PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 11/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80H

32(1)(iia). He opined that such a claim was not admissible. Invoking the provisions of section 147, the AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 26-03-2014. In the consequential assessment completed on 20-02-2015, the AO disallowed the claim of additional depreciation to the tune of 13 ITA No.1723/PUN/2014, ITA No.11/PUN/2015 & ITA No.1608/PUN/2015 Ayoki

AYOKI FABRICON PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1723/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune
20 Nov 2018
AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80H

32(1)(iia). He opined that such a claim was not admissible. Invoking the provisions of section 147, the AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 26-03-2014. In the consequential assessment completed on 20-02-2015, the AO disallowed the claim of additional depreciation to the tune of 13 ITA No.1723/PUN/2014, ITA No.11/PUN/2015 & ITA No.1608/PUN/2015 Ayoki

AYOKI FABRICON PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1608/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80H

32(1)(iia). He opined that such a claim was not admissible. Invoking the provisions of section 147, the AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 26-03-2014. In the consequential assessment completed on 20-02-2015, the AO disallowed the claim of additional depreciation to the tune of 13 ITA No.1723/PUN/2014, ITA No.11/PUN/2015 & ITA No.1608/PUN/2015 Ayoki

AYOKI FABRICON PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2155/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2155/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ayoki Fabricon Pvt. Ltd., 137 To 139, Akshay Complex, Dhole Patil Road, Pune. Pan : Aabca5780F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Circle- 1(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak & Shri Nimit Gujarathi Revenue By : Shri Yogesh Kamat, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.12.2018 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Pune Dated 14.06.2016 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Additional Depreciation Of Rs.1,10,53,748/- U/S 32(1)(Iia) On New Plant & Machinery On The Ground That The Assessee Was Not Engaged In The Business Of Manufacture Or Production Of Any Article Or Thing. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring The Fact That – I) The Details Furnished To The Assessing Officer By The Assessee During The Assessment Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Were Same As Were Furnished During The Assessment Proceedings U/S 143(3) & Therefore.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kamat, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)

section 32(1)(iia) of the I T Act and therefore, the essential condition for claiming additional depreciation that as on the date of installation of the new plant & machinery, the assessee should already be engaged in the business of manufacture or production of an article or thing, is not satisfied. Accordingly, the claim of additional depreciation at Rs.1