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.

186 results for “depreciation”+ Section 13(8)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,172Delhi3,897Bangalore1,572Chennai1,353Ahmedabad961Kolkata876Pune557Hyderabad504Jaipur402Chandigarh325Karnataka211Cochin200Indore186Visakhapatnam186Raipur184Surat183Cuttack158Amritsar136Rajkot89Lucknow74SC70Ranchi65Jodhpur61Nagpur61Guwahati60Telangana49Agra31Panaji25Dehradun22Allahabad20Kerala19Patna17Calcutta11Jabalpur7Varanasi7Rajasthan6Orissa3Gauhati2Punjab & Haryana2Tripura1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)113Section 14868Addition to Income66Depreciation46Section 14744Section 1036Disallowance29Section 148A26Section 143(2)24

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), VIJAYAWADA vs. KANDULA LAKSHUMMA MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, KADAPA

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 179/VIZ/2018[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Sept 2020AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.179/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Smt.Kandula Income Tax (Exemptions) Lakshumma Memorial Vijayawada Educational Society D.No.3/429 Raja Reddy Street Kadapa [Pan :Aadas4432Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.91/Viz/2018 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.179/Viz/2018) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) Vs. M/S Smt.Kandula Lakshumma Deputy Commissioner Of Memorial Educational Society Income Tax (Exemptions) D.No.3/429 Vijayawada Raja Reddy Street Kadapa [Pan :Aadas4432Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri B.Rama Krishna, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओ रसे / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 18.08.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.09.2020

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Rama Krishna, DR
Section 11Section 13(1)(c)

depreciation and the expenditure was disallowed to the extent of 10% amounting to Rs.11,05,053/-. 5 I.T.A. No.179/Viz/2018 and CO No.91/Viz/2018, A.Y.2013-14 M/s Smt. Kandula Lakshumma Memorial Educational Society, Kadapa 3. Against the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) found from the details furnished by the assessee that

Showing 1–20 of 186 · Page 1 of 10

...
Section 143(1)23
Deduction20
Section 1119

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

8 M/s Sai Bhaskar Iron Limited, Guntur 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. As held by the Coordinate Bench in the case of Shree Raghupati Fibres Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad, the income required to be assessed as per Section 14 of the IT Act under any one of the heads of income from

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

8 I.T.A. No.376/Viz/2019, 377/Viz/2019 and 403/Viz/2019 Cross Objection No.122/Viz/2019, A.Y.2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s Andhra Cricket Association, Vijayawada 6. On the other hand, the Ld.AR argued that in the original assessment, the AO has not examined the assessee’s eligibility regarding deduction u/s 10(23C), section 11 and 12 &13. The assessee has produced the books of accounts and furnished

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

8 I.T.A. No.376/Viz/2019, 377/Viz/2019 and 403/Viz/2019 Cross Objection No.122/Viz/2019, A.Y.2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s Andhra Cricket Association, Vijayawada 6. On the other hand, the Ld.AR argued that in the original assessment, the AO has not examined the assessee’s eligibility regarding deduction u/s 10(23C), section 11 and 12 &13. The assessee has produced the books of accounts and furnished

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

8 I.T.A. No.376/Viz/2019, 377/Viz/2019 and 403/Viz/2019 Cross Objection No.122/Viz/2019, A.Y.2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s Andhra Cricket Association, Vijayawada 6. On the other hand, the Ld.AR argued that in the original assessment, the AO has not examined the assessee’s eligibility regarding deduction u/s 10(23C), section 11 and 12 &13. The assessee has produced the books of accounts and furnished

M/S. SREE MANIPRAKASH CHARITABLE WELFARE SOCIETY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 669/VIZ/2019[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Feb 2021AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.669/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) M/S Sree Maniprakash Charitable Vs. Income Tax Officer Welfare Society (Exemptions) D.No.19-53/1 Visakhapatnam Near Railway Flyover Bridge Pendurthy, Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaots8801M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri T.S.N.Murthy, Cit(Dr) सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2021 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per D.S.Sunder Singh: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [Cit(E)], Hyderabad In F.No.Cit(E), Hyd/85(03)/80G/2018-19 Dated 30.09.2019 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019-20. 2

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N.Murthy, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 80G

8 I.T.A. No.669/Viz/2019, A.Y.2019-20 M/s Sree Maniprakash Charitable Welfare Society., Visakhapatnam 6.3. The next issue is with regard to donation receipt of ‘Loyola Sweet Home’. The Ld.AR submitted that Loyola Sweet Home is the name of orphanage/old age home and the donations are accepted in the name of Loyola Sweet Home and accounted in the books of accounts and there

THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ANDHRA PRADESH PAPER MILLS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5/VIZ/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shiv Kumar – AdvFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N. Murthy – CIT DR
Section 263Section 32

section 32 of the Income Tax Act as depreciation on intangible assets. This issue is decided in favour of appellant.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal. 8. We have heard both the sides, perused the material placed on record. 9. Since the issue is squarely covered

THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ANDHRA PRADESH PAPER MILLS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6/VIZ/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shiv Kumar – AdvFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N. Murthy – CIT DR
Section 263Section 32

section 32 of the Income Tax Act as depreciation on intangible assets. This issue is decided in favour of appellant.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal. 8. We have heard both the sides, perused the material placed on record. 9. Since the issue is squarely covered

THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1,, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE ANDHRA PRADESH PAPER MILLS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4/VIZ/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shiv Kumar – AdvFor Respondent: Shri T.S.N. Murthy – CIT DR
Section 263Section 32

section 32 of the Income Tax Act as depreciation on intangible assets. This issue is decided in favour of appellant.” 7. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal. 8. We have heard both the sides, perused the material placed on record. 9. Since the issue is squarely covered

VIZAG SEAPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OR INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 83/VIZ/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.83/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-12) Vizag Seaport Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, Pan: Abepr 5035 K Circel-5(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri Madhur Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

depreciation U/s. 32 of the Act is not available to the tax payer. The Ld. AR stated that the facts of the case ie., North Karnataka Expressway Ltd (supra) are distinguishable as it is construction of roads on the lands belonging to the Government and only the collection of toll fees was permitted to the assessee as per Government notified

VIZAG SEAPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 8(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 944/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.83/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-12) Vizag Seaport Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, Pan: Abepr 5035 K Circel-5(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri Madhur Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

depreciation U/s. 32 of the Act is not available to the tax payer. The Ld. AR stated that the facts of the case ie., North Karnataka Expressway Ltd (supra) are distinguishable as it is construction of roads on the lands belonging to the Government and only the collection of toll fees was permitted to the assessee as per Government notified

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VIZAG SEAPORT PRIVATE LIMITED, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 99/VIZ/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.83/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-12) Vizag Seaport Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, Pan: Abepr 5035 K Circel-5(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri Madhur Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

depreciation U/s. 32 of the Act is not available to the tax payer. The Ld. AR stated that the facts of the case ie., North Karnataka Expressway Ltd (supra) are distinguishable as it is construction of roads on the lands belonging to the Government and only the collection of toll fees was permitted to the assessee as per Government notified

VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. CIT(A) 14, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2479/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi v. Kelvinator Of India Limited reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) held as follows: 10 ………where the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, confers jurisdiction to re-open the assessment. Therefore, post 1-4-1989 , power to reopen

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2401/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi v. Kelvinator Of India Limited reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) held as follows: 10 ………where the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, confers jurisdiction to re-open the assessment. Therefore, post 1-4-1989 , power to reopen

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2402/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi v. Kelvinator Of India Limited reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) held as follows: 10 ………where the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, confers jurisdiction to re-open the assessment. Therefore, post 1-4-1989 , power to reopen

VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. CIT(A) 14, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2478/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi v. Kelvinator Of India Limited reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) held as follows: 10 ………where the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, confers jurisdiction to re-open the assessment. Therefore, post 1-4-1989 , power to reopen

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2400/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi v. Kelvinator Of India Limited reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) held as follows: 10 ………where the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, confers jurisdiction to re-open the assessment. Therefore, post 1-4-1989 , power to reopen

VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VMRDA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 684/VIZ/2019[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Smt. M. Kiranmayee
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 5

8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. 9. In all the above appeals for the A.Ys. 2006-07 to 2007-08 & 2010-11 the main reason for denying the exemption u/sec. 11 is treating the activities of the assessee as commercial in nature because the assessee is engaged in the activities of sale

M/S. VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(VUDA),,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE CIT, (EXEMPTIONS),, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 279/VIZ/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Smt. M. Kiranmayee
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 5

8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. 9. In all the above appeals for the A.Ys. 2006-07 to 2007-08 & 2010-11 the main reason for denying the exemption u/sec. 11 is treating the activities of the assessee as commercial in nature because the assessee is engaged in the activities of sale

VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VMRDA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 685/VIZ/2019[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Smt. M. Kiranmayee
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 5

8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. 9. In all the above appeals for the A.Ys. 2006-07 to 2007-08 & 2010-11 the main reason for denying the exemption u/sec. 11 is treating the activities of the assessee as commercial in nature because the assessee is engaged in the activities of sale