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.

2 results for “depreciation”+ Section 211(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai372Delhi352Bangalore216Chennai88Ahmedabad82Kolkata79Raipur42Hyderabad35Cochin32Jaipur21Indore20Pune19Lucknow13Chandigarh13Visakhapatnam13Surat12Karnataka11Ranchi9SC8Kerala6Dehradun5Cuttack4Agra3Jodhpur3Panaji2Patna2Rajkot2Calcutta2Nagpur1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Allahabad1Rajasthan1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 2635

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, JAMNAGAR vs. M/S. SENOR METALS PVT. LTD., JAMNAGAR

In the results the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 260/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kambleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 260/Rjt/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, C.I.T.D.R
Section 36Section 40Section 43(5)

211 (1,52,46,920) 3.2 During the assessment proceeding the main point of arguments of the assessee were as under: a) The loss is incurred on account of the derivative transaction entered into to safeguard the business of the assessee. b) The loss is allowable as business expenditure considering the CBDT circular dated

M/S. GREEN EARTH BIOGAS PVT. LTD.,SURENDRANAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 185/RJT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
Section 263

2).On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as on the subject, the\nprincipal commissioner of Income Tax – 3, Ahmedabad erred in passing order\nu/s. 263 of the Act when order passed by assessing officer is neither erroneous\nnor prejudicial to the interest of revenue.\n(3)It is prayed that order passed by learned principal commissioner