ITO 8(3)(3), MUMBAI vs. TEHCNO TARP & POLYMERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4980/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 January 2016AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the deduction under Section 10B should be allowed before setting off brought forward depreciation and losses, following various High Court judgments. Consequently, the order of the First Appellate Authority allowing the assessee's appeal was confirmed.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed a deduction claimed by the assessee under Section 10B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, arguing it should be adjusted against brought forward unabsorbed depreciation. The assessee contended that the deduction should be allowed before setting off such losses, citing previous tribunal orders.

What were the issues?

Whether the deduction under Section 10B is allowable before or after setting off brought forward unabsorbed depreciation and losses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10B,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show 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.

Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य राजे�� सद�य राजे�� राजे�� केकेकेके अनुसार राजे�� अनुसार अनुसार PER RAJENDRA, AM- अनुसार Challenging the order dated 18.4.2013 of CIT(A)-18, Mumbai the AO has filed the present appeal. 2.Assessee-company,a 100% export oriented unit is engaged in the business of manufacturing of tarpaulin products.It filed its return of income on 11.10.10 declaring total income at Rs.nil. The AO completed the assessment on 27.3.12 u/s.143(3) of the Act. During the assessment proceedings the AO found that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s.10B of the Act of Rs.1.30 crores from current business profits before setting off of the brought forward depreciation losses of earlier years.He was of the opinion that assessee should have adjusted brought forward unabsorbed depreciation of earlier years amounting to Rs.25.71.lacs from the current business profit,therefore, he held that the deduction will be allowable only after setting off of the unabsorbed depreciation pertaining to AY 2009-10. 3.Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, assessee preferred an appeal before First Appellate Authority (FAA).Before him, it was argued that the Tribunal vide its order dated 14.1.2013 had allowed the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2009-10, wherein similar addition was made by the AO and was upheld by the FAA. After considering the assessment order and submission of the assessee the FAA referred to the cases of Black and Veatch Consulting(P)Ltd.(208taxmann144),Yokogava India Ltd.(21taxmann154)and TEI Technolo - gies (P.) Ltd.(25 taxmann.com 5).Relying upon the above mentioned cases and the decision of the Tribunal for AY 2009-10, he allowed the appeal of the assessee and directed the AO to allow deduction u/s. 10B before adjusting unabsorbed depreciation and carryforward losses. 4.Before us, the Departmental Representative (DR) stated that the matter could be decided on merits. The Authorized Representative (AR) supported the order of the FAA.

4890/M/13-Techno Tarp

More judgments on Section 10B

All 1,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →