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.

218 results for “depreciation”+ Section 10clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,943Delhi4,471Bangalore1,713Chennai1,662Ahmedabad1,132Kolkata1,091Pune694Hyderabad551Jaipur499Chandigarh361Karnataka244Cochin231Surat220Visakhapatnam218Raipur217Indore209Cuttack178Amritsar159Rajkot106Lucknow88SC85Nagpur78Jodhpur71Ranchi70Telangana67Guwahati66Patna32Agra32Dehradun31Kerala29Panaji27Calcutta23Allahabad22Jabalpur13Punjab & Haryana12Varanasi9Orissa7Rajasthan6Gauhati2D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Tripura1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)117Addition to Income69Section 14868Depreciation55Section 14748Section 1036Disallowance34Section 143(2)30Section 143(1)27Section 148A

THE ANDHARA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), , VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee for the A

ITA 403/VIZ/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.376/Viz/2019 & 377/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Andhra Cricket (Exemptions) Association Exemptions Circle D.No.60-8-8, 5Th Lane Vijayawada Siddhartha Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aaatt2377D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.A.Rahim, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Shankar Narayan
Section 10Section 11Section 143(3)Section 32

depreciation. Hence, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) against the consequential order passed by the AO. 4. Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee raised a ground that the assessee is entitled for exemption u/s 10(23C)(iv) and section

Showing 1–20 of 218 · Page 1 of 11

...
26
Section 4020
Deduction18

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, , VIJAYAWADA vs. ANDHRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee for the A

ITA 377/VIZ/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.376/Viz/2019 & 377/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Andhra Cricket (Exemptions) Association Exemptions Circle D.No.60-8-8, 5Th Lane Vijayawada Siddhartha Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aaatt2377D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.A.Rahim, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Shankar Narayan
Section 10Section 11Section 143(3)Section 32

depreciation. Hence, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) against the consequential order passed by the AO. 4. Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee raised a ground that the assessee is entitled for exemption u/s 10(23C)(iv) and section

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. ANDHRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee for the A

ITA 376/VIZ/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.376/Viz/2019 & 377/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Andhra Cricket (Exemptions) Association Exemptions Circle D.No.60-8-8, 5Th Lane Vijayawada Siddhartha Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aaatt2377D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.A.Rahim, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Shankar Narayan
Section 10Section 11Section 143(3)Section 32

depreciation. Hence, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) against the consequential order passed by the AO. 4. Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee raised a ground that the assessee is entitled for exemption u/s 10(23C)(iv) and section

MAQBOOL HUSSAIN EDUCATIONAL WELFARE SOCIETY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 446/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Balakrishnan S.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohanarao, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 10

section 10(23c)(vi) of the Act, where it is clearly mentioned that the institution eligible for the deduction should not be for the purpose of profits. In respect of the addition on account of depreciation

MAQBOOL HUSSAIN EDUCATIONAL WELFARE SOCIETY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 449/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Balakrishnan S.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohanarao, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 10

section 10(23c)(vi) of the Act, where it is clearly mentioned that the institution eligible for the deduction should not be for the purpose of profits. In respect of the addition on account of depreciation

MAQBOOL HUSSAIN EDUCATIONAL WELFARE SOCIETY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 448/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Balakrishnan S.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohanarao, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 10

section 10(23c)(vi) of the Act, where it is clearly mentioned that the institution eligible for the deduction should not be for the purpose of profits. In respect of the addition on account of depreciation

MAQBOOL HUSSAIN EDUCATIONAL WELFARE SOCIETY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 447/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Balakrishnan S.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohanarao, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 10

section 10(23c)(vi) of the Act, where it is clearly mentioned that the institution eligible for the deduction should not be for the purpose of profits. In respect of the addition on account of depreciation

DE - SALES EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE PR. CIT(EXEMPTIONS),, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 389/VIZ/2016[]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 May 2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.389/Vizag/2016 (धनधाारण िर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Desales Educational Society The Pr. Cit (Exemptions) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan No.Aaaad6147Q] (अपीलाथी / Appellant) (प्रत्याथी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.V.S. Murthy, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal
Section 10

section 10(23C) of the Act, the primary requirement is the assessee should exist solely for the purpose of education. In the instant case, the objects mentioned include non educational objects and the assessee is not satisfied the condition of existence solely for educational purposes. The assessee relied on the decision of Ganga Educational Society Vs. CIT(E) cited (supra

THE DEPUTI COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. M/S. SEVEN HILLS HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 18/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-4(1), Vs. M/S. Seven Hills Healthcare Visakhapatnam. Pvt. Ltd., D.No. 11-4-4/A, Rockdale Layout, Ramnagar, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaics 2229 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Satyanandam – Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c) of the Act. During the course of penalty proceedings, assessee has submitted the following explanation:- “Depreciation of residential buildings Rs.2,59,63240/- : This disallowance was made on the ground that some of the buildings for which we have claimed depreciation @ 10

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 191/VIZ/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

depreciation to 10% as against 15% claimed by the appellant in respect of capital dredging & railway permanent way of Rs. 3,47,33,083/-. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in quantifying the relief in respect of prior period expenses as Rs. 31,62,336/- as against the correct amount of Rs. 34,97,097/-. 5. Any other ground that

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 106/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

depreciation to 10% as against 15% claimed by the appellant in respect of capital dredging & railway permanent way of Rs. 3,47,33,083/-. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in quantifying the relief in respect of prior period expenses as Rs. 31,62,336/- as against the correct amount of Rs. 34,97,097/-. 5. Any other ground that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 201/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

depreciation to 10% as against 15% claimed by the appellant in respect of capital dredging & railway permanent way of Rs. 3,47,33,083/-. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in quantifying the relief in respect of prior period expenses as Rs. 31,62,336/- as against the correct amount of Rs. 34,97,097/-. 5. Any other ground that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 200/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

depreciation to 10% as against 15% claimed by the appellant in respect of capital dredging & railway permanent way of Rs. 3,47,33,083/-. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in quantifying the relief in respect of prior period expenses as Rs. 31,62,336/- as against the correct amount of Rs. 34,97,097/-. 5. Any other ground that

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 193/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

depreciation to 10% as against 15% claimed by the appellant in respect of capital dredging & railway permanent way of Rs. 3,47,33,083/-. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in quantifying the relief in respect of prior period expenses as Rs. 31,62,336/- as against the correct amount of Rs. 34,97,097/-. 5. Any other ground that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. M/S. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 125/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.193/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Administrative Office Building, Income Tax, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Circle-1(1), Andhra Pradesh-530001. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.200/Viz/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Tax, Circle-1, Range-1, Administrative Office Building, Visakhapatnam. Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530001. Pan: Aaalv 0035 C (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(2)Section 143(3)

depreciation to 10% as against 15% claimed by the appellant in respect of capital dredging & railway permanent way of Rs. 3,47,33,083/-. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in quantifying the relief in respect of prior period expenses as Rs. 31,62,336/- as against the correct amount of Rs. 34,97,097/-. 5. Any other ground that

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), EXEMPTION CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. ANDHRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 50/VIZ/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.50/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-2017) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Andhra Cricket (Exemptions) Association Exemptions Circle D.No.60-8-8, 5Th Lane Vijayawada Siddartha Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aaatt2377D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.A.Rahim, I.T.P सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri M.A.Rahim, I.T.P
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 194CSection 2(15)

10(23C)(iv) of the Act on the ground that the income applied for charitable purposes exceeded 85%. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on total income of Rs.26,71,55,964/- and the AO held that the assessee is not eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the act on the reason that the assessee is engaged in commercial

THE ACIT,, GUNTUR vs. SAI BHASKAR IRONS LIMITED,, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 108/VIZ/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.108/Viz/2016 (ननधधारण वषा/Assessment Year:2012-13) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S.Sai Bhaskar Circle-2(1), Guntur Irons Limited 3-1-3/A, 3Rd Lane Rajendra Nagar Guntur [Pan :Aamcs1675G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Deba K.Sonowala, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri I Kama Sastry, Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.02.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2018

For Appellant: Shri Deba K.Sonowala, DRFor Respondent: Shri I Kama Sastry, AR
Section 14Section 68

Section 72(2) does not come on its way for set off. 4.2. The Ld.AR invited our attention to Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in CIT vs. Mother India Refrigeration Industries Private Ltd. (1985) 23 Taxman 0008 and argued that Hon’ble Supreme Court in para No. 10 and 11 held that the unabsorbed carried forward depreciation

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, CO raised by the assessee is disposed off as discussed herein above

ITA 26/VIZ/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.25/Viz/2014 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2010-11) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. Addl. Cit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Range-1, Visakhapatnam Port Trust) Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv0035C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

section 14A are not applicable. 4. (a) The Ld. CIT(A) is not justi8fied in confirming the disallowance of alleged excess depreciation of Rs. 5,20,74,400/- claimed in respect of capital dredging. (b) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that capital dredging is a plant and machinery and hence the appellant is entitled for depreciation

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ADDL. CIT.,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, CO raised by the assessee is disposed off as discussed herein above

ITA 25/VIZ/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.25/Viz/2014 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2010-11) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. Addl. Cit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Range-1, Visakhapatnam Port Trust) Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv0035C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

section 14A are not applicable. 4. (a) The Ld. CIT(A) is not justi8fied in confirming the disallowance of alleged excess depreciation of Rs. 5,20,74,400/- claimed in respect of capital dredging. (b) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that capital dredging is a plant and machinery and hence the appellant is entitled for depreciation

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, CO raised by the assessee is disposed off as discussed herein above

ITA 49/VIZ/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.25/Viz/2014 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2010-11) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. Addl. Cit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Range-1, Visakhapatnam Port Trust) Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv0035C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

section 14A are not applicable. 4. (a) The Ld. CIT(A) is not justi8fied in confirming the disallowance of alleged excess depreciation of Rs. 5,20,74,400/- claimed in respect of capital dredging. (b) The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that capital dredging is a plant and machinery and hence the appellant is entitled for depreciation