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 366,470 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 115JBSection 36(1)(vii)Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 14ASection 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 profitssection 115jamalgamationsection 115jbdisallowance under section 14acommercial expediencydisallowance u/s 14asection 36(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.

ITO Corporate Ward 4(1), Chennai vs. Medusa Services Private Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 2416/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2416/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Medusa Services Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Ward 4(1), Vs. No. 93, First Floor, Lakshmi Tower, Chennai 600 034. Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. [Pan:Aaecm1187F] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vepa Krishna, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.02.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Vepa Krishna, C.A
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 147

…ppeal before the Tribunal. 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. While affirming the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. 341 ITR 385, the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 391 ITR 274 has observed and held as under: “16. From a reading of the relevant provisions of Section 10A it is more than clear to us that the deductions contemplated therein is qua the eligible undertaking of an assessee standing on its own and without reference to the other eligible or non-eligible units o…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Gokaldas Images Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1557/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No. / C.O. Appellant Respondent No. & Asst. Year 77/Bang/2015 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2010-11 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 Pan Aaacg6637Q C.O. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of No.82/Bang/2015 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd (In It(Tp)A 3(1)(2), Bangalore. No.77/Bang/2015) Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 439/Bang/2016 -Do- -Do- 2011-12 582/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2011-12 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1502/Bang/2014 M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of 2009-10 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 11(3), 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Bangalore. Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1557/Bang/2014 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2009-10 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayana Murthi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…nses, the CIT(Appeals) has directed the Assessing Officer to rework the disallowance on the rule of consistency. Whereas for setoff of profit of EOU Units, the CIT(Appeals) relied on the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd 341 ITR 385 (Kar) and directed the Assessing Officer to recompute the eligible deduction under Section 10B of the Act and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved of the order of CIT(Appeals), the assessee has filed an appeal with the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the CIT(Appeals) has er…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Gokaldas Images Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 582/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No. / C.O. Appellant Respondent No. & Asst. Year 77/Bang/2015 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2010-11 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 Pan Aaacg6637Q C.O. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of No.82/Bang/2015 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd (In It(Tp)A 3(1)(2), Bangalore. No.77/Bang/2015) Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 439/Bang/2016 -Do- -Do- 2011-12 582/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2011-12 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1502/Bang/2014 M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of 2009-10 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 11(3), 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Bangalore. Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1557/Bang/2014 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2009-10 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayana Murthi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…nses, the CIT(Appeals) has directed the Assessing Officer to rework the disallowance on the rule of consistency. Whereas for setoff of profit of EOU Units, the CIT(Appeals) relied on the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd 341 ITR 385 (Kar) and directed the Assessing Officer to recompute the eligible deduction under Section 10B of the Act and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved of the order of CIT(Appeals), the assessee has filed an appeal with the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the CIT(Appeals) has er…

Gokaldas Images Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 439/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No. / C.O. Appellant Respondent No. & Asst. Year 77/Bang/2015 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2010-11 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 Pan Aaacg6637Q C.O. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of No.82/Bang/2015 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd (In It(Tp)A 3(1)(2), Bangalore. No.77/Bang/2015) Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 439/Bang/2016 -Do- -Do- 2011-12 582/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2011-12 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1502/Bang/2014 M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of 2009-10 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 11(3), 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Bangalore. Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1557/Bang/2014 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2009-10 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayana Murthi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…nses, the CIT(Appeals) has directed the Assessing Officer to rework the disallowance on the rule of consistency. Whereas for setoff of profit of EOU Units, the CIT(Appeals) relied on the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd 341 ITR 385 (Kar) and directed the Assessing Officer to recompute the eligible deduction under Section 10B of the Act and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved of the order of CIT(Appeals), the assessee has filed an appeal with the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the CIT(Appeals) has er…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Gokaldas Images Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 77/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No. / C.O. Appellant Respondent No. & Asst. Year 77/Bang/2015 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2010-11 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 Pan Aaacg6637Q C.O. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of No.82/Bang/2015 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd (In It(Tp)A 3(1)(2), Bangalore. No.77/Bang/2015) Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 439/Bang/2016 -Do- -Do- 2011-12 582/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2011-12 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1502/Bang/2014 M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of 2009-10 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 11(3), 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Bangalore. Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1557/Bang/2014 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2009-10 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayana Murthi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…nses, the CIT(Appeals) has directed the Assessing Officer to rework the disallowance on the rule of consistency. Whereas for setoff of profit of EOU Units, the CIT(Appeals) relied on the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd 341 ITR 385 (Kar) and directed the Assessing Officer to recompute the eligible deduction under Section 10B of the Act and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved of the order of CIT(Appeals), the assessee has filed an appeal with the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the CIT(Appeals) has er…

Gokaldas Images Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1502/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No. / C.O. Appellant Respondent No. & Asst. Year 77/Bang/2015 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2010-11 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 Pan Aaacg6637Q C.O. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of No.82/Bang/2015 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd (In It(Tp)A 3(1)(2), Bangalore. No.77/Bang/2015) Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 439/Bang/2016 -Do- -Do- 2011-12 582/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2011-12 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1502/Bang/2014 M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of 2009-10 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 11(3), 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Bangalore. Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1557/Bang/2014 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2009-10 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayana Murthi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…nses, the CIT(Appeals) has directed the Assessing Officer to rework the disallowance on the rule of consistency. Whereas for setoff of profit of EOU Units, the CIT(Appeals) relied on the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd 341 ITR 385 (Kar) and directed the Assessing Officer to recompute the eligible deduction under Section 10B of the Act and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved of the order of CIT(Appeals), the assessee has filed an appeal with the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the CIT(Appeals) has er…

Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5525/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…be computed with reference to profits of the eligible business / undertaking, unaffected by the profits / losses suffered in other eligible/ ineligible business owned by the assessee. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. 314 ITR 385/ 246 CTR 226 while dealing with the issue of deduction u/s 10A of the Act, observed that the relief under this section is with reference to the STP undertakings and not ITA Nos. 5524 & 5525/Del/2013 to the assessee. It was held that the phrase “total income” used in sec 10A(1) is to be understood as the total income of the STP unit. Special Bench of the Trib…

Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5524/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…be computed with reference to profits of the eligible business / undertaking, unaffected by the profits / losses suffered in other eligible/ ineligible business owned by the assessee. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. 314 ITR 385/ 246 CTR 226 while dealing with the issue of deduction u/s 10A of the Act, observed that the relief under this section is with reference to the STP undertakings and not ITA Nos. 5524 & 5525/Del/2013 to the assessee. It was held that the phrase “total income” used in sec 10A(1) is to be understood as the total income of the STP unit. Special Bench of the Trib…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5492/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…be computed with reference to profits of the eligible business / undertaking, unaffected by the profits / losses suffered in other eligible/ ineligible business owned by the assessee. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. 314 ITR 385/ 246 CTR 226 while dealing with the issue of deduction u/s 10A of the Act, observed that the relief under this section is with reference to the STP undertakings and not ITA Nos. 5524 & 5525/Del/2013 to the assessee. It was held that the phrase “total income” used in sec 10A(1) is to be understood as the total income of the STP unit. Special Bench of the Trib…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

ITA 5491/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: 1. That the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in up
Section 14ASection 35D

…be computed with reference to profits of the eligible business / undertaking, unaffected by the profits / losses suffered in other eligible/ ineligible business owned by the assessee. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. 314 ITR 385/ 246 CTR 226 while dealing with the issue of deduction u/s 10A of the Act, observed that the relief under this section is with reference to the STP undertakings and not ITA Nos. 5524 & 5525/Del/2013 to the assessee. It was held that the phrase “total income” used in sec 10A(1) is to be understood as the total income of the STP unit. Special Bench of the Trib…

Famy Care Private Limited (Formerly Known As Famy Care Limited), Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5984/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman (Am) Famy Care Pvt Ltd, Acit, Circle-2(1)(2), Mumbai 3Rd Floor, Brady House, 12/14, Veer Nariman Road, V/S Fort, Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaacf 0632Q Appellant Respondednt

Section 10Section 10ASection 10BSection 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 70

…evail upon the CBDT circular dated 28th August 2012. The assessee specifically contended that the loss of ineligible unit should not be set off against the income of eligible unit in view of the decision of Karnataka High Court in case of CIT Vs Yokogava Ltd (341 ITR 385) and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs TEI Technologies (25 Taxmann.com 5). 3. The reply of assessee was not accepted by assessing officer by taking his view that CBDT circular No. 7/DV/2013 dated 16th July 2017 provides for deduction under section 10A/10AA/ 10B and not exemption. The deduction is to be allowed after giving effect to…

Competent Software Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 236/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 4Section 6Section 80H

…2011- 12, the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition and the coordinate Bench of ITAT has confirmed the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in ITA No. 625/Del/2016. He further relied on the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd (2012) 341 ITR 385. 6. The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the Ld. CIT(A). The facts are not been in dispute. 3 Competent Software Pvt. Ltd. 7. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Yokogawa India Ltd (supra) held as under:- "15. Sub-section 4 of Section 10A which provides for pr…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 3805/DEL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘C’, New Delhi Before : Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri O.P. Kant, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 IRCON International Limited, vs. Addl. C.I.T., Range-11, Palika Bhawan, R.K. Puram New Delhi. Sector-13, New Delhi (PAN: AAACI0684H) (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 2234/Del/2005& 3805/Del/2008 Assessment Year: 2001-02& 2003-04 Dy. C.I.T., Range-11(1), vs. IRCON International Limited, New Delhi. Palika Bhawan, R.K. Puram Sector-13, New Delhi (Appellant) (Responden…

Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 705/DEL/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2002-2003

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘C’, New Delhi Before : Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri O.P. Kant, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 IRCON International Limited, vs. Addl. C.I.T., Range-11, Palika Bhawan, R.K. Puram New Delhi. Sector-13, New Delhi (PAN: AAACI0684H) (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 2234/Del/2005& 3805/Del/2008 Assessment Year: 2001-02& 2003-04 Dy. C.I.T., Range-11(1), vs. IRCON International Limited, New Delhi. Palika Bhawan, R.K. Puram Sector-13, New Delhi (Appellant) (Responden…

DCIT, Circle-11(1) vs. Ircon International Ltd

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 2234/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘C’, New Delhi Before : Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri O.P. Kant, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 IRCON International Limited, vs. Addl. C.I.T., Range-11, Palika Bhawan, R.K. Puram New Delhi. Sector-13, New Delhi (PAN: AAACI0684H) (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 2234/Del/2005& 3805/Del/2008 Assessment Year: 2001-02& 2003-04 Dy. C.I.T., Range-11(1), vs. IRCON International Limited, New Delhi. Palika Bhawan, R.K. Puram Sector-13, New Delhi (Appellant) (Responden…

Ircon International Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 3804/DEL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘C’, New Delhi Before : Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri O.P. Kant, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 IRCON International Limited, vs. Addl. C.I.T., Range-11, Palika Bhawan, R.K. Puram New Delhi. Sector-13, New Delhi (PAN: AAACI0684H) (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 2234/Del/2005& 3805/Del/2008 Assessment Year: 2001-02& 2003-04 Dy. C.I.T., Range-11(1), vs. IRCON International Limited, New Delhi. Palika Bhawan, R.K. Puram Sector-13, New Delhi (Appellant) (Responden…

Ircon International Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, Range-11

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 1825/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘C’, New Delhi Before : Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri O.P. Kant, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 IRCON International Limited, vs. Addl. C.I.T., Range-11, Palika Bhawan, R.K. Puram New Delhi. Sector-13, New Delhi (PAN: AAACI0684H) (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No. 2234/Del/2005& 3805/Del/2008 Assessment Year: 2001-02& 2003-04 Dy. C.I.T., Range-11(1), vs. IRCON International Limited, New Delhi. Palika Bhawan, R.K. Puram Sector-13, New Delhi (Appellant) (Responden…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S Infosys Bpo Ltd, Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1333/BANG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt.Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Miss. Neera Malhotra, CIT, DR
Section 10ASection 14ASection 40

…a Elxsi Limited 349 ITR 98 has not been accepted by the department and an appeal has been filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to follow the 6. ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Court in the case of YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD. in 341 ITR 385(Kar) and allow the claim of the assessee of the deduction u/s 10A without setting off the losses of other units without appreciating the fact that the decision of the Karnataka High Court has not reached finality as a SLP has been preferred against the said decision. The CIT(A) erred hi directing the AO to allow the claim of the assessee of the…

Gloabal Mansions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 2(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1192/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjeet Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Manish Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…e added under 4 M/s. Global Mansions P. Ltd. clause (VI) of explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) for the purpose of computing book profit. The Ld. A.R. also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. (2012) (341 ITR 385) in which it has been held that while computing the book profits in accordance with section 115JB of the Act, the provisions for bad and doubtful debts can not be added in the book profits as the same is not an unascertained liability. The Ld. A.R. also relied on the case of ACIT vs. Vodafone Essar Gujarat Ltd. in ITA No.1999/AG 2008 in which the…

M/S Mcml Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 is allowed

ITA 454/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. K. R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…cts of the appellant in that there was only one STPI unit in that case whereas the appellant had both STPI and Non-STPI units 4. The Learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs Yokogawa, 341 ITR 385 is squarely applicable to the facts of the appellant's case, which has been since confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court 5. The Learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the settled legal position is that the deduction u/s 10A for the STPI unit has to be granted without adjusting the loss of the Non-STPI unit. 6. The Learned CIT(A) erred in n…