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 394clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi375Mumbai358Bangalore122Chennai102Ahmedabad70Kolkata54Jaipur38Raipur30Pune22Hyderabad20Chandigarh14Visakhapatnam11Indore11Surat7SC5Lucknow4Ranchi4Cuttack4Calcutta4Jodhpur4Karnataka3Rajkot2Cochin2Telangana2Guwahati2Orissa1Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 683Section 142(1)3Section 143(3)2Unexplained Cash Credit2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. GANDHI REALITY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 110/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, Ld. CIT. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 230

Section 391 to 394 of Companies Act will have a statutory force binding on all and the sanction of the Court would operate as a judgment in rem; Enunciates that merging of both schemes by the CIT(A) is incorrect as the parties are different, and ITAT observes that the CIT(A) is trying to rewrite the scheme which

THE ITO, WARD 1(3), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S PAVAN CONSTRUCTION CO, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 760/RJT/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Oct 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri M. J. Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 133(6)Section 40A(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

section 145(3) of the Act, It is settled law that unless the book result is rejected, trading additions could not be made. (e) It is the essence of the decision of Hon'ble Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot the case of Girish M, Mehta (2006) 99 TTJ (Rajkot) 394 that the significant mistakes in vouchers cannot be 3 base