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.

1,699 results for “depreciation”+ Search & Seizureclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai519Delhi442Bangalore172Chennai123Hyderabad69Jaipur68Kolkata52Amritsar33Chandigarh33Pune26Guwahati21Lucknow21Ahmedabad17Karnataka11Nagpur11Surat10Raipur9Rajkot8Indore8Cuttack8Visakhapatnam6SC6Allahabad5Cochin5Ranchi4Telangana4Agra3Kerala1Patna1Dehradun1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 153A75Addition to Income75Section 143(3)65Section 14853Section 13242Search & Seizure39Section 14737Section 153C31Disallowance30Depreciation

WIND WORLD INDIA INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT -2, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2370/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

search and seizure proceedings the assessee filed its „return of income‟ u/s 153A of the „Act‟ on 27.02.2014, declaring a loss of Rs. 9,53,44,278/-. That during the course of the assessment proceedings it was observed by the A.O that the assessee had not shown any income from its business activities. The A.O thereafter proceeded with and framed

WIND WORLD WIND RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT -2, MUMBAI

Showing 1–20 of 1,699 · Page 1 of 85

...
28
Section 25016
Section 6816

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2371/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

search and seizure proceedings the assessee filed its „return of income‟ u/s 153A of the „Act‟ on 27.02.2014, declaring a loss of Rs. 9,53,44,278/-. That during the course of the assessment proceedings it was observed by the A.O that the assessee had not shown any income from its business activities. The A.O thereafter proceeded with and framed

J.N INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 2, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2373/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

search and seizure proceedings the assessee filed its „return of income‟ u/s 153A of the „Act‟ on 27.02.2014, declaring a loss of Rs. 9,53,44,278/-. That during the course of the assessment proceedings it was observed by the A.O that the assessee had not shown any income from its business activities. The A.O thereafter proceeded with and framed

WIND WORLD WIND RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT -2, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2372/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

search and seizure proceedings the assessee filed its „return of income‟ u/s 153A of the „Act‟ on 27.02.2014, declaring a loss of Rs. 9,53,44,278/-. That during the course of the assessment proceedings it was observed by the A.O that the assessee had not shown any income from its business activities. The A.O thereafter proceeded with and framed

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4512/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

search and seizure action was never executed at the business premises of the assessee firm. Disregarding the provisions of law notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee firm to which the assessee filed the return of income, under protest, claiming the same deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. So far as, legal issue/jurisdictional issue

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4511/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

search and seizure action was never executed at the business premises of the assessee firm. Disregarding the provisions of law notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee firm to which the assessee filed the return of income, under protest, claiming the same deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. So far as, legal issue/jurisdictional issue

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4513/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

search and seizure action was never executed at the business premises of the assessee firm. Disregarding the provisions of law notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee firm to which the assessee filed the return of income, under protest, claiming the same deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. So far as, legal issue/jurisdictional issue

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 812/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

search for the purpose beyond the plain meaning of the law. The object of the law is set out in unambiguous term. If every allottee chosen after a process of selection under the Rules with reference to certain objective criteria were to enter into bargains of this nature, it will undoubtedly make the law a hanging (sic laughing) stock

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. KARNANI SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 480/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 68

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore, have to be read\ntogether. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power which\nenables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding\n assessment year of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if\nduring the course of search under section 132, incriminating material\njustifying the reopening

MAHADHAN AGRITECH LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SMARTECHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD ) ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-50, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2226/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mahadhan Agritech Ltd. (Formerly Cit(A)-50, Dcit Cen. 8(1), Known As Smartchem Technologies 656, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Ltd.), Mumbai-400021. Survey No. 93, Sai Hira, Mundhwa, Pune-411036. Pan No. Aacca 5046 P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: 28/11/2024
Section 132Section 153ASection 69A

depreciation claim. It is stated that the said appeal is presently pending adjudication. pending adjudication. 2.1 Subsequently, a search and seizure

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 709/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore,\nhave to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power\nwhich enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding assessment\nyear of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of\nsearch under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 712/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore,\nhave to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power\nwhich enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding assessment\nyear of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of\nsearch under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 710/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore,\nhave to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power\nwhich enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding assessment\nyear of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of\nsearch under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening

JOTHI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

ITA 2569/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2011-12
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

seizure operation conducted at the premises of the assessee rather assessment has been based upon special audit report whereas such facts were already brought on record by the assessee by filing original return of income along with computation, the assessment framed u/s.153A read with section 143 (3) is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence the assessments

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2577/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

seizure operation conducted at the premises of the assessee rather assessment has been based upon special audit report whereas such facts were already brought on record by the assessee by filing original return of income along with computation, the assessment framed u/s.153A read with section 143 (3) is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence the assessments

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2574/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

seizure operation conducted at the premises of the assessee rather assessment has been based upon special audit report whereas such facts were already brought on record by the assessee by filing original return of income along with computation, the assessment framed u/s.153A read with section 143 (3) is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence the assessments

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2575/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

seizure operation conducted at the premises of the assessee rather assessment has been based upon special audit report whereas such facts were already brought on record by the assessee by filing original return of income along with computation, the assessment framed u/s.153A read with section 143 (3) is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence the assessments

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2571/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

seizure operation conducted at the premises of the assessee rather assessment has been based upon special audit report whereas such facts were already brought on record by the assessee by filing original return of income along with computation, the assessment framed u/s.153A read with section 143 (3) is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence the assessments

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2576/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

seizure operation conducted at the premises of the assessee rather assessment has been based upon special audit report whereas such facts were already brought on record by the assessee by filing original return of income along with computation, the assessment framed u/s.153A read with section 143 (3) is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence the assessments

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2573/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

seizure operation conducted at the premises of the assessee rather assessment has been based upon special audit report whereas such facts were already brought on record by the assessee by filing original return of income along with computation, the assessment framed u/s.153A read with section 143 (3) is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence the assessments