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.

6 results for “depreciation”+ Section 12clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,467Delhi4,208Bangalore1,626Chennai1,485Kolkata977Ahmedabad640Hyderabad408Jaipur342Pune297Karnataka239Chandigarh211Raipur190Surat168Indore146Amritsar124Cochin119Visakhapatnam104Cuttack94SC78Lucknow78Rajkot75Telangana58Jodhpur53Ranchi51Nagpur49Guwahati33Dehradun27Panaji26Patna22Allahabad20Kerala20Agra20Calcutta19Varanasi9Jabalpur6Punjab & Haryana6Rajasthan6Orissa6Gauhati2MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Tripura1

Key Topics

Section 808Section 80I7Addition to Income6Section 294Section 115J4Depreciation4Section 69C3Section 43Section 143(3)

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX FARIDABAD vs. M/S NHPC LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

ITA/336/2015HC Punjab & Haryana20 Sept 2019

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2Section 2(24)Section 24Section 260ASection 28

depreciation on land not allowable in Companies Act.” 8. “Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT was right in law in confirming the order of Ld. CIT(A) to allow the contention of the assessee company for charging the interest u/s 234B at Rs.3,70,58,281/- instead of Rs.4

3
Deduction3
Disallowance3
Section 22

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

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OSD LUDHIANA vs. M/S CEIGALL INDIA LTD

ITA/61/2021HC Punjab & Haryana06 Aug 2022

Bench: Cit(A). The Same Was Partly Allowed. The Addition Made By Applying Net Profit Dinesh Kumar 2022.10.16 16:54 I Attest To The Accuracy & Integrity Of This Document

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)Section 260Section 29Section 40Section 69C

12% on the total gross receipt was reduced to 6.5% of the total gross receipt. Addition under Section 69C of the act on account of unexplained expenditure was deleted. The order passed by CIT(A) was taken in appeal before ITAT by the revenue. The appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed. 4. We have heard counsel for the appellant

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

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, CHD vs. M/S VENUS REMEDIES LTD.

ITA/81/2012HC Punjab & Haryana25 Jul 2024

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

Section 33BSection 35(2)Section 4Section 69CSection 80Section 80I

Depreciation of nditure on R&D u/s 35(2) of revenue expenses on scientific 36,344/- to the Baddi Unit or ion u/s 80IC, when the assessee n e ) o e d e ) C g g f f c r e RAJESH KUMAR 2024.07.29 12:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court

C I T vs. M/S GLAXO SMITHKLINE CONSUMER HELATHCARE LTD.

ITA/271/2009HC Punjab & Haryana05 Feb 2026

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Section 260ASection 80Section 80H

Section 80-I. Contention of appellant is not sustainable. Accordingly, aforesaid question is answered in favour of assessee. 5. Question No.5:- Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT is correct in law in holding that expenditure incurred on implementation of the new ERP package, an input to take business decisions DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.02.09 12