How many judgments cite CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.?

270 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. (341 ITR 385), spanning 2012 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115JB, Section 36(1)(vii), Section 10(34), Section 10(35), Section 14A, Section 2(24).

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.

341 ITR 385High Court2012#296 most cited

What is CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. authority for?

A provision for doubtful debts cannot be added back while computing book profits under Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes.

270

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. · Section 115JB · book profits · MAT computation · provision for doubtful debts · add-back · Section 36(1)(vii) · Minimum Alternate Tax · book profit calculation · doubtful debt provision · Karnataka High Court · 17 Taxmann.com 15

Also reported as

204 Taxmann 30517 Taxmann.com 15246 CTR 226

Sections most often in play

Section 115JB Section 36(1)(vii)Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 14A Section 2(24)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40(a)(ii)

Issues it is cited on

section 115jb(2)section 36(1)(vii)section 36(2)section 40(a)(i)book profits section 115j amalgamation section 115jb disallowance under section 14a commercial expediency disallowance u/s 14a section 36(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.

Asst CIT Cir 1, Kalyan vs. Asb International P. Ltd, Ambernath

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 7034/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7034/Mum/2013 & 7035/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 & 2006-07) Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S Asb International बनाम/ Income Tax – Circle 1, Pvt. Ltd., V. Kalyan, E-9, Addl Ambernath Indl. 1St Floor,, Area, Mohan Plaza, Midc Anand Nagar, Wayale Nagar, Ambernath. Khadakpada, Kalyan. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan :Aaaca8424F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave &For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Bora

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 32(2)Section 72

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “A” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7034/Mum/2013 and 7035/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2004-05 and 2006-07) Asstt. Commissioner of M/s ASB International बनाम/ Income Tax – Circle 1, Pvt. Ltd., v. Kalyan, E-9, Addl Ambernath Indl. 1st Floor,, Area, Mohan Plaza, MIDC Anand Nagar, Wayale Nagar, Ambernath. Khadakpada, Kalyan. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN :AAACA8424F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Vijay Kumar Bora…

Prexus Health India (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2975/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotraassessment Year : 2011-12 Prexus Health India (P) Ltd., Acit, Circle- 20(1), Ra-4 (Shop), Inder Puri, New Delhi. Vs. New Delhi – 110 012. Pan : Aadcp 7893 A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vidur Puri, CAFor Respondent: Shri F. R. Meena, Sr.DR

Section 10ASection 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 2(45)Section 28Section 44CSection 5

…. 7. ………. 8. ……….. 9. ……….. 10. The above judgments are distinguishable as under: (I) As regards ITAT, Bangalore judgment [111 TTJ 548] in the case of Yokogawa India Ltd, the Karnataka High Court has decided the issue in favour of the assessee as mentioned in 341 ITR 385; (II) As regards ITAT, Chennai Bench judgment (22 SOT 220) in the case of Changepond Technologies Pvt. Ltd., the said company was an Intervener in the ITAT, Chennai special Bench judgment in the case of Scientific Atlanta India Technology (P) Ltd v. ACIT reported in 129 TTJ 273 which has been decided in assessee’s favour. (III) As regards Karnata…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Xansa India Ltd., Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3672/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Smt Suchitra Kamblesteria India Ltd. (Estwhile Vs Acit Xansa India Ltd.) Circle-18(1) Seaview Special Economic New Delhi Zone, Building 4, Plot No. 20 & (Respondent) 21, Sector-135, Gautam Budh Nagar Noida Aaacx0385L (Appellant) Dcit Vs Xansa India Ltd. Circle-18(1) (Now Known As Steria India Ltd.,) New Delhi C-2, Sector-1 (Appellant) Noida Aaacx0385L (Respondent)

Section 10(14)Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 195Section 40a

…whether can be reduced from the income from other sources by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. AR submitted that unobserved depreciation can be set out with any income. The Ld. AR relied upon the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court judgment in case of CIT Vs. Yokogawa 341 ITR 385. The Ld. AR submitted that Section 10A deduction is in the form of disallowance only. The Ld. AR also relied upon the ITAT Delhi Bench order in case of Canam International (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 37 ITR (T) 38. 8. The Ld. DR quoted Section 32(2) and further stated that depreciation merged with next year for which Section 10A is claimed is not proper as…

Steria India Ltd. (Estwhile Xansa India Ltd.), Noida vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3264/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Section 10(14)Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 195Section 40a

DCIT- Circle 6(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Synova Innovative Technologies Pvt Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the department is dismissed

ITA 1876/BANG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K.Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Ms. S. Praveena, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Ms. G. Vaidehi, CA

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…age 3 of 4 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred on appeal to the First Appellate Authority. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee. The CIT(A) followed the judgments of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. (341 ITR 385) and CIT vs. Tata Elxsi (349 ITR 98). 5. Aggrieved, the revenue has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal, the learned DR relied on the grounds raised. The learned AR submitted that the issues raised are covered in favour of assessee by jurisdictional High Court Judgments, which has been relied on by the CIT (A). 6. I have heard rival…

ITO Ward-1(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Anthem Biosciences Pvt Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of Department is Dismissed

ITA 1841/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri George George Kincome Tax Officer Vs. M/S. Anthem Biosciences Pvt. Ltd., Ward-1(1)(2), No. 49, Canara Bank Road, Bangalore. Bommasandara Industrial Area, Hosur Road, Bangalore – 560 099. Pan : Aafca7588P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. S. Praveena, Addl. CIT

Section 10BSection 143(3)

…ard losses. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred on appeal to the First Appellate Authority. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee. The CIT(A) followed the judgments of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. (341 ITR 385) and CIT vs. Tata Elxsi (349 ITR 98). Page 4 of 5 5. Aggrieved, the revenue has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal, the learned DR relied on the grounds raised. The learned AR submitted that the issues raised are covered in favour of assessee by jurisdictional High Court Judgments, which has been relied on by the CIT (A). 6. I have he…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Nous Info Systems Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 63/BANG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. S. Jayaramani.T.A No.63/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -5(1)(1), Bengaluru .. Appellant V. M/S. Nous Info Systems P. Ltd, No.1, 1St Main, 1St Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru 560 004 .. Respondent Pan : Aaacn4584B Assessee By : Shri. Ujwal Tiwari, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Vijaykumar N, Addl. Cit Heard On : 14.09.2016 Pronounced On : 11 .11.2016 O R D E R Per S. Jayaraman:

For Appellant: Shri. Ujwal Tiwari, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Vijaykumar N, Addl. CIT

Section 10Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 148Section 155Section 72

…A)-5, Bengaluru . The CIT(A) , inter alia, relying the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the assessee’s case in ITA Nos 1099 &109 of 2008 & 2009 for ay s 2003-04 & 2005-06, respectively, and in the case of CIT v Yokogawa India Ltd (2002) 341 ITR 385 has allowed the appeal. Thereafter, the Revenue filed this appeal with the following grounds: ITA.63/Bang/2016 Page - 4 3. We heard the rival submissions and perused relevant orders. The relevant portion of the judgment from the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v Yokogawa India Ltd (2002) 341 ITR 385 is extracted as under : “29. Fo…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Fives Call Kcp Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 2859/CHNY/2014[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Nov 2016AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarअपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A.No.2859/Mds/2014 अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year : 1999-2000 वष" Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Five Cail Kcp Ltd Tax, Vs. Ramakrishna Buildings, Corporate Circle - 2(1), No.2. Dr. P.V. Cherian Crescent, Chennai - 600 034. Egmore, Chennai - 600 008. [Pan: Aaacf 1763G]

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCITFor Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 80Section 80H

…re the tribunal has considered the issue in respect of section 10A and 10B and held that deduction u/s. 10A of the Act has to be allowed without setting off the loss and the Ld. AR also relied on the judicial decision of CIT Vs Yokogawa India Ltd. and others 341 ITR 385, (Karnataka). The Hon'ble High Court observed that the exemption u/s. 10A has to be allowed without setting off brought forward unabsorbed losses and the depreciation from earlier assessment year or current assessment year either in the case of non STP Units or in the case of very same undertaking. 7. The Ld. AR further supported the order of t…

Xchanging Solutions Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 1294/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT-I (D.R)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 211(6)Section 244A

…CIT Vs M/s Himatasingike Seide Ltd.(Supra) was delivered by considering the un-amended provisions of Sec.10A/10B of the IT Act, 1961 prior to 2001. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in a subsequent decision in the case of CIT Vs M/s Yokogawa India Ltd (341 ITR 385)(Supra), after considering the amended provisions of Sec.10A/10B of the IT Act, has decided this issue in favour of the assessee. By following the decision in the case of M/s Yokogawa India Ltd (341 ITR 385)(Supra) the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Safran Aerospace India Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT in ITA No.1261(B)/2010, had consi…

M/S. Tecnotree Convergence Ltd., Bengalore vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2007/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.L.P.Sahu

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…Act. The issue raised is that whether the said benefit should be computed without taking into consideration unabsorbed depreciation. The Tribunal by the impugned order has followed the decision of Karnataka High Court vs ACIT v.Yokogava India Limited, (2012) 341 ITR 385 (Karnataka). Bombay High Court has also reached the same conclusion though for different reasons in Hindustan Lever Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr., (2010) 325 ITR 102 (Bombay). These two decisions were noticed and their final finding approved by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v.TEI Technologies Private Limited in…

M/S Gangagen Biotechnologies Pvt Ltd vs. The Income Tax Officer

The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent

ITA/243/2016HC Karnataka21 Sept 2016

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 260

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR ITA NO.243 OF 2016 BETWEEN M/S GANGAGEN BIOTECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD 12, 5TH CROSS, RAGHAVENDRA LAYOUT OPP.MEI LTD., TUMKUR ROAD YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE-560022 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER DR. JAYASHEELA M AGED 66 YEARS S/O SRI NARSIMHA MURTHY MANUR ...APPELLANT (BY KUM.JINITHA CHATTERJEE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.S PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE) AND THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD…

Arcadis India Private Limited vs. Nill

The appeals are dismissed

COP/27/2016HC Karnataka16 Sept 2016

Bench: SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

Section 10ASection 260

…n as a substantial question of law. 4. So for as the above referred question No.2 is concerned, the matter is covered by the earlier decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax and another vs. Yokogawa India Limited reported in 341 ITR 385. Further, the matter was carried by the Revenue before the Apex Court against the above referred decision of this Court and the Apex Court vide its order in the case of Yokogawa India Limited reported in 391 ITR 274 (SC) has disposed of the appeals. 5 5. Under the circumstances, question No.2 also would not remain as a substan…

Softbrands India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 1094/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Cherian K Baby, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Sibichen K Mathew, CIT (D.R)

Section 10ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)

…lowing the deduction under Section 10A without setting off of loss incurred by the non-STPI unit. 4.1 The learned AR of the assessee has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. & others (341 ITR 385) as well as the decision in the case of CIT vs. M/s.Auringene Discovery Technologies Ltd. in ITA No.549/2013 dated 05/09/2014 and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has reiterated the view taken in the case 9 IT(TP)A No.1094/Bang/2011 of Yokogawa India Ltd.(supra). He has also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal dated 30/4/2014 in the…

Asst CIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Godrej Sara Lee Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 118/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Falee H. Bilimoria-ARFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Vispute-DR

Section 115Section 115JSection 143Section 154Section 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “ “ “ “ जी जी जी” खंडपीठ जी Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“G”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, "याियक राम लाल नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/118/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2005-06 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" ACIT- 14(1)(2) M/s. Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. (Now Room No.460, 4th Floor, amalgamated into Godrej…

M/S Yahoo Software Development India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, these grounds are dismissed as

ITA 1046/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri. Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri. G. R Reddy, CIT – DR-I

Section 10ASection 144CSection 234B

…IT(TP)A.1046/B/2011, IT(TP)A.1651 & 1685/B/2013 Page - 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH 'A', BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T(TP).A No.1046/Bang/2011 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/s. Yahoo Software Development India P. Ltd, Torry Pines, Embassy Golf Links Business Park, Off Indiranagar, Koramangala Intermediate Ring Road, Bemga;iri 560 071B .. Appellant PAN : AAACY1876D v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle -12(5), Bengaluru .. Respondent I.T(TP).A No.1685/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2008-09) (By the Assesse…

M/S Genisys Integrating Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical

ITA 1571/BANG/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT

Section 10A

…order, whereas the ld. AR of the assessee supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). He also submitted that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs Yokogawa India Ltd., 341 ITR 385(Kar.). He has also submitted that on pages 430 to 446 is a Tribunal order rendered in the case of M/s Mindteck (India) Ltd. in ITA No.1054/Bang/2013 dated 04- ITA Nos.1571 & 1661(B)/2012 07-2014 and in this case, the Tribunal had followed the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of M/s Yokogawa India Ltd., (Supra) a…

M/S Ramsoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1460/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Ramsoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd. No.104A, 4Th Cross, Electronic City, Hosur Road, Bangalore-561229. … Appellant Pa No.Aaacr 6948 R Vs. Deputy Commisioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 12(4), Bangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, JCIT(A)

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…f brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation before claiming deduction u/s 10A of the Act. This issue is covered in favour of the assessee-company by Page 5 of 9 the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. (341 ITR 385) wherein it was held as follows: 21. Prior to the introduction of sub-section (6) of sections 10A and 10B of the Finance Act, 2000, which came into effect from April 1, 2001, in computing the total income of the assessee of the previous year relevant to the assessment year immediately succeeding the last of the relevant assessment years, or of an…

Pr. Commissoner of Income Tax-4 vs. M/S Makino India Pvt Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/290/2016HC Karnataka28 Jun 2016

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

…ppellants-Revenue. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants-Revenue fairly concedes that the question of law is covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax & Another –vs- Yokogawa India Ltd. & Ors. reported in (2012) 341 ITR 385 (Karn). 3 4. In our view, when the question is already covered by the decision of this Court, we do not find any substantial question of law would arise for consideration. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/-…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax-4 vs. M/S Makino India Pvt. Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/265/2016HC Karnataka28 Jun 2016

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Danish Steel Cluster Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the department as well as the CO by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 871/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Moorthi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jt. CIT(DR)

Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…Appeals) after considering the submissions made by the ld. AR for the assessee, held as regards setting off of brought forward losses that the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd., 341 ITR 389 (Kar). The CIT(A) further held that the ruling is applicable with equal force in respect of set off of unabsorbed depreciation. Therefore, the CIT(A) ITA Nos.1394/B/2015, 871 & 872/B/16 & CO 4/B/16 Page 4 of 7 directed the AO to work out the deduction u/s. 10B of the Act before set off of brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation. 7.…