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.

5 results for “depreciation”+ Section 271(1)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai832Delhi826Bangalore179Ahmedabad147Chennai114Jaipur72Kolkata69Raipur49Hyderabad42Indore37Pune33Lucknow24Chandigarh20Amritsar13Visakhapatnam12SC11Surat7Guwahati6Telangana6Karnataka6Ranchi5Rajkot5Patna5Allahabad4Varanasi4Cuttack3Jodhpur2Cochin2Jabalpur2Nagpur2S. B. SINHA MARKANDEY KATJU1Panaji1Agra1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Calcutta1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)10Section 80P(2)(b)9Section 143(3)5Section 1484Penalty4Section 2713Section 2633Addition to Income3Section 1472Section 234A

ANUP A. SHAH,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 106/RJT/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Mar 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 106/Rjt/2017 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Asstt. Years: 2005-2006 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A

b) Made on a/c of capital expenditure Rs.18,745/- Made on a/c of non verified expenses Rs.13,100/- Made on a/c. of personal expenses Rs.18,100/- Made on a/c. of excess depreciation Rs.10,208/- Total confirmed additions Rs.21,71,700/- 8. Accordingly, the AO issued fresh show notice proposing to levy of penalty under section 271(1

2
Disallowance2
Deduction2

SHRI KANJIBHAI B. RANGANI,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7/RJT/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

B-TI i.e.(computation of income) as well as schedule CG i.e. Capital Gain and in schedule EI i.e. Exempt Income. The assessee failed to comply in response to notice u/s 142(1) dtd. 01-12-2010 even after the assessee was supplied with a copy of reasons for reopening. The assessee did not submit any reply to the final

SURENDRANAGAR DISTRICT CO OP PRODUCERS UNION LIMITED,SURENDRANAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SURENDRANAGAR CIRCLE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 429/RJT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 429/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2014-15) Surendranagar District Co. Op. Acit, Circle, Producers Union Ltd. Vs. Surendranagar-363035 Plot No.249, Phase 2 Gidc Market Yard Circle, Sursagar Dairy, Wadhwan Road, Surendranagar-363035 (Guj) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaas8375B (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : Heard On 09/10/2025, Refixed For Clarification On 03.11.2025 & Finally Heard On 02.02.2026 : 10/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 80P(2)(b)Section 80P(2)(d)

271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 7. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed the interest charged u/s 234A/B/C of the I. T. Act, 1961. 8. That, the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) are not justified and are bad-in-law.” 3. First, we shall take ground No. 1 and 2, above, raised by the assessee

GIRISH LAHORI,GANDHIDHAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 283/RJT/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Dec 2025AY 2010-11
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69

b) are\napplicable or both the sections are applicable\nWhether assessment is proposed to be made for first time.\nNo\nIf the reply is in the affirmative, please state\na\nWhether any voluntary return had already been filed\nNo\nItse the date of filing in the said return\nNA\n9\nIf the answer to item 8 is in the negative

M/S. SIMERO VITRIFIED P. LTD. ,MORBI vs. THE PR. CIT-3 , RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 276/RJT/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 May 2025AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32ASection 68

b) Unsecured Loans (squared up or not) raised during the year;\n(c) Sundry Creditors, and\n(d) Sustainability of claim u/s 32AC\n3. Accordingly, a notices u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 03-02-2021 along with questionnaire were issued to the assessee for calling details/explanations regarding above relating the raised issues in its justification