DELTA MANUFACTURING LIMITED,NASHIK vs. CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed set off of unabsorbed depreciation against dividend income received from a foreign subsidiary. The PCIT initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, holding the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The assessee argued that Section 115BBDA was not applicable as the dividend was from a foreign company and received after the specified date.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that Section 115BBDA is not applicable as the dividend was from a foreign company and received in a later financial year. Therefore, the PCIT's order under Section 263 was not justified.
What were the issues?
Whether the PCIT was justified in revising the assessment order under Section 263 when the dividend income was from a foreign subsidiary and Section 115BBDA was not applicable. Whether the set-off of unabsorbed depreciation against such income was permissible.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH: MUMBAI
PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai - 6 [‘Ld. PCIT’], passed u/s 263 dated 05.02.2026, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its return of income on 23.11.2022, declaring total income at Rs. Nil after claiming set off of unabsorbed depreciation of Rs. 18,82,71,334/-.
Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act was completed on 23.03.2024, accepting the returned income. Though, there was no adjustment or variation between the returned income and th
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 263
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs M/S Rajguru Foods, BijapurITA 77/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- S R P Jutha 13 Rajkot VI and Gr S Ma, Rajkot vs ITO WD 1(2)(1) Rajkot, RajkotITA 951/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Vadodara vs The Pr. CIT, Vadodara-1, VadodaraITA 1066/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Vadodara vs The Pr. CIT, Vadodara-1, VadodaraITA 1065/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Zabuben Mepabhai Bharvad, Ahmedabad vs The PCIT - 1, AhmedabadITA 1233/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shaik Mohammed Abdul Jabbar vs. The Principal Commissioner/CommissionerTelangana · 7 Oct 2026
- Kamalakanta Nayak vs. The Additional CT And GST Officer, Mayurbhanj Circle,BalasoreOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- Jagadish Prasad Agrawala vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- M/S.Shree Jagannath Engineering Co.,Kendujhar vs. Assistant Commissioner Central GST And Customs, KeonjharOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- Gagan Kumar Das vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 7 Oct 2026