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.

8 results for “depreciation”+ Section 253(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai609Delhi518Bangalore116Chennai103Kolkata75Chandigarh42Jaipur35Ahmedabad31Pune30Lucknow20Hyderabad17Cuttack16Guwahati14Amritsar14Surat14Rajkot14Indore13Cochin12Raipur8Panaji7SC6Jodhpur6Telangana6Karnataka5Ranchi5Varanasi4Nagpur3Allahabad3Dehradun2Patna1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)17Section 143(2)8Section 2638Addition to Income8Section 686Section 145(3)3Depreciation3Section 1272Section 2532Disallowance

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), RAIPUR vs. PSA CONSTRUCTION, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 145/RPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 250(4)Section 253

253 by the Revenue in the case of PSA construction For the A.Y. 2014-15-- request regarding – Appellant The revenue Partnership firm Assessment year 2014-15- Trading of tractors, trolly and parts ITR us 139 03-09-2014 Rs.77,71,280/- Assessed income 24-12-2016 Rs.3,10,30,484/- us 143(3) Addition Rs.2

M/S POORNACHAND AGRAWAL, BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAIPUR-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

2
Natural Justice2
Deduction2

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 104/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 104/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Pooranchand Agrawal C/O. Bagadia Enterprises, Near Shiv Talkies, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495001 Pan : Aaifp8483G

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

3) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act, dated 17.02.2021 for two-fold reasons, viz. (i) that as the A.O while allowing the assessee’s claim for depreciation on tractor and grader dozer that was purchased on 30.03.2018 without verifying as to when the same was registered with the Road Transport Authority and was actually put to use, therefore

VISHAL BUILDERS, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 263/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.263/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vishal Builders 7/619, Gawri Bhawan, Fafadih Naka, Raipur-492001(C.G.) Pan : Aaefv1401G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Raipur, C.G.

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

depreciation, finance charges and partners remuneration and interest on capital. 10 Vishal Builders vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) 7. We have deliberated at length on the issue in hand and concur with the specific observation of the CIT(Appeals) that the AO had rejected the books results of the assessee not on the basis of any substantial lapse

RANCHI FUELS, BALODA BAZAR, BHATAPARA,BALODA BAZAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHATAPARA, BHATAPARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 532/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.532/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Ranchi Fuels Limtara, Nandghat, Baloda Bazar-492 006 (C.G.) Pan: Aatfr0836L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Bhatapara (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

253(5) of the IT Act. The rejection of application for condonation of delay has serious civil consequences upon the status of the Society, as by rejection of the application of the appellant Society, the Society would not be able to claim tax exemption under the provisions contained in Sections 11 & 12 of the IT Act, and that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), RAIPUR vs. M/S SANJAY AGRAWAL, RAIPUR

ITA 82/RPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 82/Rpr/2018 Co No.05/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sanjay Agrawal 35-36, Millenium Plaza, G. E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aapfs0532E ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ar Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24.05.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09.06.2022

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145

depreciation, finance charges and partners remuneration and interest on capital. 7. We have deliberated at length on the issue in hand and concur with the specific observation of the CIT(Appeals) that the AO had rejected the books results of the assessee not on the basis of any substantial lapse in its books of account, but rather on the basis

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-2, RAIPUR vs. M/S RADHESHYAM AGRAWAL , RAIPUR

ITA 42/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 42/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central)-2, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Radheshyam Agarwal L-24, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aacfr8916J ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K Mishra, DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(4)

depreciation allowance and deduction on account of interest and finance charges separately after estimation of income. In this context the appellant has relied upon the CBDT circular 29D(XIX-14) dated 31.08.1965. However, in view of the relief allowed to the appellant in the first and second grounds above these grounds of appeal are infructuous and hence not dealt separately

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX, RAIPUR vs. BALAJEE LOHA PVT. LTD., RAIPUR

ITA 356/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 356/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Amit M. Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

Depreciation Rs.3,14,33,840/- Rs.3,14,33,840/- Total Assessed Income Rs.11,11,09,885/- Total income assessed and rounded to Rs.11,11,09,890/- MATT profit shown at Rs.41,22,113/- is as per return. Assessed as above u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act. Interest levied as per sec.234 A/13/C/D, as applicable, Tax calculation

M.J. STEELS PVT. LTD.,RAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR

ITA 28/RPR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 28/Rpr/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Kumar SinghaniaFor Respondent: Shri P. K. Mishra
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 263Section 263(1)Section 68

253. ITAT-Raipur Page 1 of 11 AY – 2015-2016 2. The short issue under this appeals is that, the appellant company challenged the validity of revisionary action directing the AO for fresh adjudication against an apparent error in applying the provisions of section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. 3. The appellant raised a solitary legal ground