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”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai475Delhi320Chennai133Bangalore120Jaipur114Kolkata77Ahmedabad72Hyderabad53Chandigarh34Pune33Indore28Raipur27Cochin24Lucknow18Nagpur17Surat17Visakhapatnam14Rajkot12Guwahati12Ranchi8Varanasi7Amritsar7Jodhpur6Agra6Telangana5Cuttack5Allahabad5SC3Karnataka3Dehradun2Patna2Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 2635Addition to Income4Section 13(1)(e)3Section 260A2Section 13(2)2Section 1442Section 2602

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. M/S.TRANSPORT CORPORATION OF INDIA

In the result, we set aside the assessment orders, except to

ITTA/133/2014HC Telangana03 Aug 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

For Appellant: --------------------------------------------------------For Respondent: ------------------------------------------------------
Section 11Section 132Section 44Section 44A

depreciation claimed by the assessee was also allowed. In all other respects, the assessment orders were confirmed. 3. The Revenue and the assessee filed appeals challenging the orders passed by the first appellate authority before the Tribunal. The Tribunal disposed of those appeals by Annexure C orders. The appeals filed by the Revenue were allowed and among the appeals filed

THE COMMI.OF INCOME TAX,HYD. vs. VAIBHAV

ITTA/134/2003HC Telangana14 Sept 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

For Appellant: SRI A.V.KRISHNA KOUNDINYA, SENIOR COUNSELFor Respondent: SRI J.V'PRASAD, SC FOR l'T DEPARTMENT
Section 1aSection 250Section 260Section 68

unexplained investment as against Rs.2,13,,A7393.C0 added by the assessing officer. Explanation fumished by the assessee was found to be not satisfactory. Accordingly, qT(A) uide the order dated 27.02.2CC1 directed the assessing officer to treat Rs.2,74,36,5A2.A0 as u.rexplained investment and to add the same to the income of the assessee. 8. Insofar the other

M/s.CCL Products [India] Limited vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax-I

ITTA/360/2011HC Telangana20 Aug 2013
Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

investment towards acquisition of furnace of 5 MT or that the AO has allowed depreciation thereon, i.e., furnace of 5 MT. There is no material on record to hold that the claim of depreciation made by the assessee on the furnace of 4 MT was rejected by the AO. 21. Besides, the statement of Shri Harmesh Arora has several gaps

The Commissioner of Income Tax-V vs. Smt.R.Amala Devi

ITTA/15/2009HC Telangana15 Jun 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 260A

investment by passing a non speaking order. C. Whether Hon’ble ITAT erred in law in upholding the addition on account of “Addition to fixed assets” when such assets are appearing in the balance sheet. D. Whether the order passed by Hon’ble Tribunal is in accordance with law. 3. The appellant is a partnership firm against whom an assessment

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, vs. M/s Padmapriya Real Estates AND Financiers

In the result, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment passed by

ITTA/478/2006HC Telangana10 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 13(1)(e)Section 13(2)Section 313

unexplained expenditure of the appellant which has been acquired from illegal source. The inventory is Ex.P/101 which he has been prepared in 9 sheets. In his cross-examination he admitted that at the time of marriage, the parents usually given the necessary articles to bride and groom like bed, sofa and almirah etc. He further admitted that the ornaments