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 220(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai400Delhi312Bangalore120Chennai93Ahmedabad76Jaipur66Kolkata56Cochin40Raipur38Hyderabad29Pune20Nagpur14Lucknow14Indore12Cuttack11Chandigarh10Kerala8Surat7Karnataka6Amritsar5Panaji5Ranchi5Rajkot3SC3Visakhapatnam3Allahabad2Dehradun2Rajasthan1Guwahati1Patna1Calcutta1Jodhpur1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 32(2)10Section 1477Section 143(3)7Depreciation5Addition to Income5Disallowance3Section 1482Section 12Section 14A2Set Off of Losses

ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD vs. M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD , DHANBAD

ITA 300/RAN/2017[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026

Bench: Hon'Ble Itat - By It Department Si No.

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation has already been adjudicated in the assessee's own case by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal, respectfully following the observations of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal and for the identical reasons, the order of the Id. CIT(A) stands upheld and the issue is held in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 5. Next issue

M/S BHARAT COOKING COAL LTD ,DHANBAD vs. ACIT CIR-1 , DHANBAD

ITA 294/RAN/2017[12-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026

Bench: Hon'Ble Itat - By It Department Si No.

2
Carry Forward of Losses2
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)

depreciation has already been adjudicated in the assessee's own case by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal, respectfully following the observations of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal and for the identical reasons, the order of the Id. CIT(A) stands upheld and the issue is held in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 5. Next issue

ITO (EXEMPTIONS), JAMSHEDPUR vs. JYOTI PUNJ EDUCATIONAL AND WELFARE SOCIETY, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 144/RAN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi22 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: None appearedFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mondal, JCIT, ld. Sr.DR
Section 12ASection 147

220 of 2005-2006 dated 30.01.2006. The society’s old registration number was 740/95-96 registered by IG Registration, Bihar, Patna. The society is also registered u/s. 12AA of the I.T Act, 1961 vide order No. CIT/JSR/Tech/VIII- 44/02-03/6070-73 dated 31.03.2003 of the CIT, Jamshedpur. It is a registered society engaged in the activities of imparting educations and running educational institutions

ABILITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,SAKCHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 20/RAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.20/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ability Services Pvt. Ltd…….....................…...........................……….……Appellant 232 Kumhar Para, New Baradwari Sakchi, Jharkhand-831001. [Pan: Aacce1395H] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Jamshedpur.....…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 02, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 09, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 18.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Contract & Transportation & Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2014-15 By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.81,52,900/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny & Assessment Was Framed On A Total Assessed Income Of Rs.84,49,220/-. Subsequnetly, Proceedings U/S 148 Were Initiated Vide Notice Dated 30.03.2021 & Assessment Was Completed On 20.03.2022 Wherein The Assessing Officer Made Addition Of Excess Depreciation Of Rs.36,64,657/- & Payment Of Epf/Esi Beyond The Due Date But Prior To Filing Of Return Of Rs.5,31,940/-

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

220/-. Subsequnetly, proceedings u/s 148 were initiated vide notice dated 30.03.2021 and assessment was completed on 20.03.2022 wherein the Assessing Officer made addition of excess depreciation of Rs.36,64,657/- and payment of EPF/ESI beyond the due date but prior to filing of return of Rs.5,31,940/- I.T.A. No.20/Ran/2024 Ability Services Pvt. Ltd 4. Dissatisfied with the above order

M/S BIJAY KUMAR SANTOSH KUMAR ,DHANBAD vs. ITO WARD-1(2), DHANBAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 78/RAN/2018[10-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 May 2019

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.78/Ran/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) M/S Bijay Kumar Santosh Kumar Vs. Ito, Ward-(1)2, Dhanbad Bata More, Jharia, Dhanbad-828111 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacfb 1219 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.K.Mondal, Acit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 21/05/2019 आदेश / O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dhanbad, Jharkhand, Dated 24.01.2018 Passed In First Appeal No.16/Dhn/2013-14 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming Disallowance Of Remuneration/Commission Paid To The Partners Smt. Manju Devi Drolia & Smt. Sangeeta Drolia. Remuneration Was Paid As Per Deed Of Partnership & Is An Allowable Expenditure. Disallowance As Confirm By Ld. Cit(A) Is Illegal & Incorrect. Both Were Working Partners Of The Firm. Nothing On Record Was Bought By Ld. A.O. To Contradict This Fact. As Such. Disallowance Made Is Unjustified & Illegal. 2. For That The Consultancy Charges Were Paid, To M/S H. K. Drolia & Company (Chartered Accountant) For Providing Consultancy Charges During The Year Under Consideration. The Same Has Been Paid In Past & Future & No Disallowance Was Made.

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, ACIT(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234A

220 Taxman 51 (Delhi) (Mag.) Pentair Water India (P) Ltd. V. Addl. CIT [2014] 47 taxmann.com 132 (Panaji) and Macawber Engg. System (I) (P) Ltd. V. Asstt. CIT [2013] 33 taxmann.com 587 (Mum-Trib) in which it is clearly held that the UPS is the component/equipment connected with the computers and is, therefore, entitled for the depreciation @60%. Again