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.

7 results for “depreciation”+ Section 133(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai815Delhi631Bangalore308Chennai125Ahmedabad118Kolkata115Jaipur85Raipur46Pune37Indore34Chandigarh32Hyderabad27Lucknow22Surat18Visakhapatnam17Nagpur13Guwahati13Amritsar12Karnataka9SC7Rajkot5Agra4Jodhpur3Varanasi3Cuttack2Cochin2Telangana2Patna2Ranchi2Jabalpur1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 1154Section 803Section 43Section 11A2Deduction2

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

Appeals are hereby dismissed

C.A. No.-013771-013771 - 2015Supreme Court06 Dec 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

Section 260ASection 80

depreciation on the assets used for power generation. This additional issue has been raised by the revenue in Civil Appeal No.13771 of 2015 (Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s Jindal Steel and Power Ltd.). Revenue has also raised the issue of expenditure in Civil Appeal No.7425 of 2019 (Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s Reliance Industries Ltd.). The expenditure claimed

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL vs. DY.COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX & ANR.ETC.ETC

Appeals are allowed accordingly

C.A. No.-002039-002041 - 1996Supreme Court17 Jan 1996
For Respondent: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFINCOME-TAX (ASSTS) III, HYDERABAD
Section 115

133 (Magazine Section) and having noticed diametrically opposite views expressed in two decisions of the Tribunal - one reported in 39 I.T.D. 432 Butwelded Tools (P) Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax and the opposite decision rendered by the Hyderabad Bench in V.V. Trans Investment (P) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer (42 ITD 242) we are of the opinion

COMMNR. OF CUSTOMS (GENERAL), N. DELHI vs. GUJARAT PERSTORP ELECTRONICS LTD

The appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-008568-008569 - 2001Supreme Court05 Aug 2005
For Respondent: M/s. Gujarat Perstorp Electronics Ltd
Section 28(1)

133 ELT 9 (SC), set it aside allowing the appeal filed by the Department. Since the decision of the Larger Bench of CEGAT cannot be said to be a good law in view of the decision of this Court referred to above, all the appeals deserve to be allowed by setting aside the order passed by CEGAT. The learned counsel

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

C.A. No.-021762-021762 - 2017Supreme Court19 Oct 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 12AA(1) of the IT Act, on 18.05.1979 and is engaged in the activity of promotion of the export of all kind of ready-made garments, knitwear, and garments made of leather, jute and hemp. It does not per se engage in any activity for profit, and its mandate is to ensure that Indian apparel manufacturers, are given forums

M/S. VIKRAM CEMENT vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, INDORE

C.A. No.-001197-001197 - 2005Supreme Court24 Aug 2005
For Respondent: Commissioner of Central Excise,Indore

133) ELT 3. In the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in J.K.. Udaipur Udyog Ltd. (supra), this Court took the view inter alia that the Modvat scheme was different and distinct from the Cenvat scheme whereas according to the assessees, there was no such difference except that Cenvat scheme covered inputs, capital goods and services

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,SIMLA vs. M/S GREEN WORLD CORPORATION

Appeals are disposed of with the aforementioned directions

C.A. No.-003312-003312 - 2009Supreme Court06 May 2009
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 80I

133-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as, “the said Act”) and verified for herself: (a) factum of the existence and actual working of Unit; (b) Installation of Plant and machinery working with the aid of power; (c) Presence of requisite number of workers, some of whose statement were records

COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, TAMIL NADU vs. M/S. SOUTHERN STRUCTURALS LTD

C.A. No.-000180-000180 - 2003Supreme Court06 Aug 2008
Section 11ASection 4

133) ELT 481 wherein it was held that the cost of inspection would form part of the value. In this case, the contract itself provided that the cost of testing at Government expenses will be to the contractor's account. Therefore, the amount received would be includible in the C.A.No.180/03 .... (contd.) - 5 - assessable value and longer period of limitation