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.

6 results for “depreciation”+ Section 46Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi256Mumbai236Hyderabad55Kolkata54Chennai53Ahmedabad50Bangalore36Amritsar33Jaipur32Chandigarh24Visakhapatnam22Pune18Lucknow17Indore15Guwahati13Cuttack12Raipur10Surat6Nagpur6Dehradun4Cochin4Allahabad4Agra3Calcutta2Rajkot2Karnataka2Patna1Telangana1Varanasi1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 43B8Section 46A6Section 251(1)6Addition to Income6Deduction3Section 35A2Depreciation2Disallowance2Set Off of Losses2

INCOME TAX OFFICER, SILVASSA vs. ANSUYA PUSHPVIJAYSINH PARMAR , SILVASSA

In the result, all three appeals filed by the Revenue as well as all the three cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 770/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth Ita Nos. 769 To 771/Srt/2024 Assessment Year 2015-16 To 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Upadhyay, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. D.R
Section 251(1)Section 43BSection 46A

46A(3) of the Act. 1.2 On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld CIT(A) erred in allowing the assessee's appeal with a direction to verify the claim then allow, which is nothing but deemed setting aside the assessment, and such powers ceased to exist with effect from 01.06.2001 by the Finance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, SILVASSA vs. ANSUYA PUSHPVIJAYSINH PARMAR, SILVASSA

In the result, all three appeals filed by the Revenue as well as all the three cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 769/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth Ita Nos. 769 To 771/Srt/2024 Assessment Year 2015-16 To 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Upadhyay, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. D.R
Section 251(1)Section 43BSection 46A

46A(3) of the Act. 1.2 On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld CIT(A) erred in allowing the assessee's appeal with a direction to verify the claim then allow, which is nothing but deemed setting aside the assessment, and such powers ceased to exist with effect from 01.06.2001 by the Finance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, SILVASSA vs. ANSUYA PUSPAVIJAYSINH PARMAR, SILVASSA

In the result, all three appeals filed by the Revenue as well as all the three cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 771/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth Ita Nos. 769 To 771/Srt/2024 Assessment Year 2015-16 To 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Upadhyay, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. D.R
Section 251(1)Section 43BSection 46A

46A(3) of the Act. 1.2 On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld CIT(A) erred in allowing the assessee's appeal with a direction to verify the claim then allow, which is nothing but deemed setting aside the assessment, and such powers ceased to exist with effect from 01.06.2001 by the Finance

M/S. VALENTINE CINE VISION LIMITED,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4),, SURAT

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

ITA 2438/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. DR
Section 43B

section 43B of the Act. An addition of Rs. 3,18,66,883/- was made on this account. Further, the Assessing Officer proceeded to reject the books of accounts of the assessee and worked out the average gross profit for three years at 56.25% and made an addition of Rs. 1,53,48,584/- on this account. Apart from this

THE ITO, WARD-4(4),, SURAT vs. M/S. VALENTINE CINE VISION LIMITED,, SURAT

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

ITA 2419/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. DR
Section 43B

section 43B of the Act. An addition of Rs. 3,18,66,883/- was made on this account. Further, the Assessing Officer proceeded to reject the books of accounts of the assessee and worked out the average gross profit for three years at 56.25% and made an addition of Rs. 1,53,48,584/- on this account. Apart from this

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURAT vs. M/S SURAT LIFE CARE PVT. LTD., SURAT

ITA 160/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.160/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Acit, Vs. M/S. Surat Life Care Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 3, Unique Hospital, Opp. Kiran Motor, Surat Nr. Sosyo Circle Lane, Surat - 395002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aarcs8396M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By 14/12/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2023

Section 115BSection 131Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 35ASection 68

depreciation. The assessee again filed revised Return of Income in which deduction u/s 35AD of the Act was revised to Rs.4,74,44,030/- @ 150% of the expenditure. However, no documentary evidences viz-a-viz details of expenditure of capital nature incurred, date of commencement of operation of the new hospital, copy of various licenses and permission required and number