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 “depreciation”+ Section 10(15)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,954Delhi3,705Bangalore1,501Chennai1,299Kolkata836Ahmedabad535Hyderabad315Jaipur296Pune226Raipur174Karnataka173Chandigarh160Indore124Surat120Amritsar107Cochin95Visakhapatnam83SC68Lucknow67Rajkot62Cuttack62Ranchi47Telangana45Jodhpur43Nagpur33Guwahati28Patna22Kerala19Dehradun17Panaji9Varanasi9Allahabad9Calcutta9Agra7Rajasthan5Jabalpur5Punjab & Haryana4Orissa3Gauhati2Tripura1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Depreciation3Section 262Section 1442Section 260A2Addition to Income2

MANGE RAM MITTAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/51/2007HC Punjab & Haryana14 Nov 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Section 132(1)Section 143Section 144Section 147Section 158

depreciation of section 32;] g s f f s n d e r h n n d l e f r f r d n VARINDER SINGH 2024.11.14 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment ITA N 5. interpreted b considered b and relatable information a evidence whi officer has an relatable to s Therefore

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB SMALL INDUSTRIES & EXPORT CORPN. LTD

The appeal stands disposed of

ITA/9/2012
HC Punjab & Haryana
25 Feb 2020

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Section 260A

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 23.03.2011 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh passed in ITA No.79/Chandi/2011 for the assessment year 2007-08. [2] Following question of law is claimed:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in upholding the order

CIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB SMALL IND. AND EXPORT CORP. LTD.

The appeal stands disposed of

ITA/705/2008HC Punjab & Haryana25 Feb 2020

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Section 260A

Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 30.05.2008 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh passed in ITA No.611/CHD/2006 for the assessment year 2003-04. [2] Following question of law is claimed:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in upholding the order

M/S Y.S. AND CO-OWNERS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ETC.

ITA/20/2008HC Punjab & Haryana09 Sept 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Section 144Section 167B(2)(i)Section 2Section 26

depreciation deduction @ appellant we explore the r provisions of attracted. 6. co-owners ha ITRs, there w 7. passed by th applicable to 8. 9. Companies j landlord and loans were a Y.S. & Co-ow was to be t Tribunal has f . 20 of 2008 on the cost of plinths was r @ 10% on the cost of plinths