M/S. SYNERGY RENEWABLE ENERGY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RANGE-3, KOLKATA, ASANSOL
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that, following Supreme Court decisions on Section 10A (analogous to 10B), brought forward unabsorbed depreciation should not be set off against the current year's profit of the eligible unit before allowing the Section 10B deduction.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed deduction under Section 10B on its business income without setting off brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation. The AO disallowed the deduction, arguing that these prior period adjustments must be made first. The CIT(A) allowed set-off of business loss but not unabsorbed depreciation before the 10B deduction.
What were the issues?
Whether unabsorbed depreciation brought forward from earlier years must be set off against business income before allowing deduction under Section 10B.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.290 citing291 CTR 1 · 2017 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH ‘A’, KOLKATA
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, AM & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM]
order
: November 29, 2017 ORDER
Per P.M. Jagtap, AM
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT (Appeals) Asansol dated 27.08.2014 and the grievance of the assessee is projected therein by way of the following solitary ground: “Considering the facts of the case and relevant provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Asansol [CIT(A)] has erred in holding that before giving benefit of deduction u/s 10B of the I.T. Act, 1961 (the Act) un-absorbed depreciation brought forward had to be set off from the business income of the year as against assessee’s claim that assessee was eligible for exemption u/s 10B of the Act to the extent of Rs. 2,25,99,048.64 against business income of the year Rs. 2,34,31,833.85 before setting off of un-absorbed depreciation and business loss brought forward from earlier.”
The assessee in the present case is a company which is engaged in the business of manufacturing of Solar Photovoltaic Modules etc.
2 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Synergy Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. and Bio-mass Energy. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 24.09.2009 declaring a total income at NIL after claiming deduction under section 10B amounting to Rs. 2,25,99,049/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed by the A.O. that there was business loss of Rs. 2,29,24,167/- and unabsorbed depreciation amounting to Rs. 1,15,00,448/- carried forward from the earlier years. In the computation of total income, deduction under section 10B was claimed by the assessee on account of its business income without setting off carried forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation. According to the A.O., the assessee was entitled to claim deduction under section 10B from its business income only after setting off the carried forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation. He, therefore, set off the carried forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation to the extent of Rs. 1,14,37,241/- and Rs. 1,15,00,448/- against the business income of the assessee for the year under consideration and since the business income so arrived at after setting off the carried forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation was NIL, no deduction under section 10B was allowed by the A.O. to the assessee in the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide and order dated 27.12.2011.
Against the order passed by the A.O. under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) and after considering the submissions made by the assessee as well as the material on record, the Ld. CIT (A) allowed the claim of the assessee that the carried forward business loss should be allowed to be set off against the business income of the assessee only after allowing 3 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Synergy Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. deduction under section 10B. He, however, held that the unabsorbed depreciation was liable to be set off against the business income before allowing deduction under section 10B and the said deduction thus was to be allowed on account of business income of the assessee for the year under consideration after adjusting the unabsorbed depreciation. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard the arguments of both the sides on this issue and also perused the relevant material available on record. It is observed that the issue involved in this appeal of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Yokogawa India Ltd. 291 CTR 1 wherein one of the questions referred to the Hon’ble Supreme Court for consideration was whether brought forward business losses and unabsorbed depreciation of 10A units or non 10A units can be set off against the profits of another 10A units of the assessee. This question was answered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in favour of the assessee by holding that though Section 10A, as amended, is a provision for deduction, the stage of deduction would be while computing the gross total income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act and not at the stage of computation of the total income under Chapter VI. It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the reading of relevant provisions of Section 10A makes it clear that the deduction contemplated therein is qua the eligible undertaking of the assessee standing on its own and without reference to the other eligible or non-eligible units or undertakings of the assessee. It was held that the 4 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Synergy Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. benefit of deduction under section 10A thus is given by the Act to the individual undertaking and resultantly flows to the assessee. This decision rendered in the case of Yokogawa India Ltd. (supra) has been subsequently followed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs J.P. Morgan India Pvt. Ltd. 297 CTR 16 to hold that while computing deduction under section 10A, brought forward unabsorbed depreciation and loss are not to be set off against the current year profit of the eligible unit. Since the provisions of section 10A are analogous with the provisions of Section 10B, we respectfully follow the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Yokogawa India Ltd. (supra) and J.P. Morgan India Ltd. (supra) and direct the A.O. to allow deduction under section 10B to the assessee as computed on the profits of the eligible unit for the year under consideration without setting off the brought forward unabsorbed depreciation.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 29th November, 2017. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) (P.M. Jagtap) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 29/11/2017 Biswajit, Sr. PS Copy of order forwarded to: 1. M/s. Synergy Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd., C/o. ARSK & ASSOCIATES, Chartered Accountants, 22, R.N. Mukherjee Road, 3rd Floor, Kolkata – 01.
More judgments on Section 10B
- Brainbees Solutions Limited, Pune… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITTPA 1431/PUN/2026[2022-2023]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- ACIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai vs Galaxy Surfactants Limited, MumbaiITA 6984/MUM/2025[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Sept 2026AY 2011-2012
- Ivl Dhunseri Petrochem Industries Pvt… vs D.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), KolkataITTPA 4/KOL/2026[2022-2023]Status: Heard11 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- T vs Motor Co. Ltd., Chennaivs.DCIT, Corp…ITTPA 52/CHNY/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed9 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Vrajlal Chanabhai Kachhadiya, Jamnagar vs ITO, Ward-2(6), JamnagarITA 847/RJT/2025[2010-11]Status: Disposed7 Sept 2026AY 2010-11
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026