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.

The Pr.Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S Cibersites India Pvt Ltd

ITA/844/2017HC Karnataka04 Jan 2018

Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY (AG.CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

Section 260

…nsel appearing for the appellants fairly submits that the questions raised in this appeal are answered against the appellants by this Court in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [(2012) 349 ITR 98 (Karn)] and CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [(2012) 341 ITR 385 (Karn)]. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Appeal dismissed. Sd/- ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE hkh.…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Btp Infoserve Private Limited

ITA/100019/2016HC Karnataka20 Nov 2017

Bench: S.SUJATHA,H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 260Section 260ASection 263

…preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench, Panaji in ITA.No.250/PNJ/2015, which came to be allowed relying upon the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court of Karnataka in the case of Yokogawa India Limited reported in 341 ITR 385. Aggrieved by the said order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the revenue is in this appeal. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the revenue would fairly submit that, in view of the judgment passed ITA.No.100019/2016 4 by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Petition No.8498/2013 (Disposed of on 16.12.2016), the issue involved in this…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S Celstream Technologies Pvt Ltd

ITA/338/2016HC Karnataka15 Nov 2017

Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY (AG.CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

Section 260

…ITA No.338/2016 C/W ITA No.335/2016 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 338/2016 C/W INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.335/2016 BETWEEN : 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIT(A), 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 F…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S Celstream Technologies Pvt Ltd

ITA/335/2016HC Karnataka15 Nov 2017

Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY (AG.CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

Section 260

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S. Cibersites India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for the asst

ITA 1325/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazit(Tp)A No.1325/Bang/2016 (Asst. Year – 2010-11) The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle – 2(1)(1), Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S Cibersites India Pvt. Ltd., 5Th Floor, Tower ‘D’, Ibc Knowledge Park, 4/1, Bannerghata Road, Bengaluru. . Respondent Pan – Aabck2797E. Appellant By : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Cit Respondent By : Shri Dwarkanath – Employee Of Company Date Of Hearing : 7-11-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10-11-2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, CITFor Respondent: Shri Dwarkanath – Employee of company

Section 10ASection 143(3)

…st. 3) Whether the CIT(A) is right on the issue of set off of brought forward of losses(From non-STPI unit) for deduction u/s 10A, since the order on which the CIT(A) has relied on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd.,(341 ITR 385), which is not accepted by the Department and the SLP filed on this issue is pending before the Supreme Court. 4) For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the order of the CIT(A) in so far as it relates to the above grounds may be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer may be restored.” 4. Groun…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S Tata Elxsi.Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1774/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Jason P.Boaz, Am

For Appellant: Shri Farahat Qureshi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri P.C.Khincha, CA

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 2

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Shri Jason P.Boaz, AM ITA No.1774/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 Dy.Commissioner of Income- M/s.Tata Elxsi Limited tax, Circle 7(1)(1) Vs. ITBP, Hoody, Whitefield Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 048 PAN : AAACT7872Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Farahat Qureshi, CIT-DR Respondent by : Shri P.C.Khincha, CA Date of Pronouncement : 03.11.2017 Date of Hearing : 24.10.2017 O R D E R Per George George K, JM This appeal at the instance of the Revenue is directed against CIT(A)’s order dated 29.02.20…

Phonix Lamps Ltd vs. Addl CIT Range

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2845/DEL/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2017AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2003-04 M/S Pheonix Lamps Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 59A, Nsez, Phase-Ii, Range Noida. Noida. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By :S/Shri Shashwat Bajpai, Sharat Agrawal, Adv. Respondent By : Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: S/Shri Shashwat Bajpai, Sharat Agrawal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR

Section 10ASection 10A(6)

…transpose the section from Chapter III to Chapter VI-A of the Act which is titled “deductions to be made in computing total income”. This aspect of the matter has been adverted to and discussed by the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. (2012) 341 ITR 385 (Karn). It has been observed by the Karnataka High Court as follows (page 396): (Para 17) “The substituted section 10A continues to remain in Chapter III. It is titled as “Incomes which do not form I.T.A. 2845/Del/2007 Assessment year 2003-04 part of total income.’ It may be noted that when section 10A was recast by Finance Act, 2001, Parliament…

Altimetrik India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 1294/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR) (ITAT)-2, Bengaluru

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C(2)

…rned D.R. and considered the relevant material on record. At the outset, we note that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. 341 ITR 385 which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide decision reported in 391 ITR 274 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in paras 15 to 17 as under : “ 15. Sub-section 4 of Section 10A which provides for pro rata exemption, necessarily involving deduction of the profits arising out of domestic sales, is one instance of deduction pro…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Indian Products Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for the asst

ITA 145/BANG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazthe Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle – 3(1)(1), Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S Indian Products Ltd., 604A, Queens Corner Apartment 3, Queens Road, Bengaluru. . Respondent Pan – Aaaci6463L Appellant By : Shri Ramesh B.R, Jcit Respondent By : Shri T Ravindran, C.A Date Of Hearing : 19-10-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-10-2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh B.R, JCITFor Respondent: Shri T Ravindran, C.A

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

…he order of the learned CIT(A) is opposed to law and facts of the case. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs M/s Yokogawa India Ltd., (341 ITR 385) 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in holding that the deduction u/s l0B was to be deducted from the income of the eligible unit i.e. before computing the Gross Total Income. 4. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the order of the CIT(A) in so far as it relat…

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax CIT(A) vs. M/S. Infosys Bpo Ltd

ITA/334/2016HC Karnataka11 Oct 2017

Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY (AG.CJ),P.S.DINESH KUMAR

Section 260

…ITA No.334/2016 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.334/2016 BETWEEN : 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIT(A), 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BANGALORE – 560 095 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), 2ND FLOOR…

M/S Crossdomain Solutions Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for the asst

ITA 429/BANG/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazita Nos.429 & 430/Bang/2017 (Asst. Year – 2007-08 & 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle – 2(1)(1), Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S Crossdomain Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Cenex, 94, 2Nd Main, Industrial Suburb Ii Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bengaluru. . Respondent Pan – Aaccc1271G Appellant By : Shri L.V Bhaskar Reddy, Addl. Cit Respondent By : Shri Ashwin Rao, C.A Date Of Hearing : 5-10-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 6-10-2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri L.V Bhaskar Reddy, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin Rao, C.A

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

…(A)-2, Bangalore allowed the assessee’s appeals, inter alia, in respect of its claim for deduction u/s 10B of the Act following the judicial pronouncements rendered on this issue by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd., (341 ITR 385) and Tata Elxsi Ltd., (349 ITR 98). 4.1 Aggrieved by the combined orders of the CIT-2, Bangalore dated 24/7/2015 for both asst. years 2007-08 and 2010-11, Revenue has filed these appeals raising the following identical grounds for both asst. years:- ITA Nos.429-430/B/17 5 “1) The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and circumstanc…

Ac|It-Circle 5(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Omni Matrix Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1505/BANG/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodiaassessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. H. L. Soumya Achar, JCIT

Section 10BSection 32Section 72

…other grounds on or before hearing of the appeal. 2. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee has contended that impugned issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd., [2012] 341 ITR 385 (Kar). The CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue following the judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Yokogawa (supra). Now the judgment of jurisdictional High Court has been approved by the Apex Court. Therefore there is no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). 3. Having carefully examined the order of the CIT(A), we find no in…

M/S Thomson Reuters India Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1565/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR-II)

Section 10ASection 10A(2)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 7A

…ing aspects are not pressed by the assessee. 16. Regarding ground no. 11, it was submitted that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. as reported in 341 ITR 385 wherein it was held that 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 the very same undertaking. We have considered the rival submissions. Regarding the first aspect of th…

JCIT, Bangalore vs. Omni Matrix Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 865/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, JCIT (D.R)For Respondent: None

Section 10ASection 10BSection 4Section 6Section 80H

…ature of exemption but it is in the nature of deduction. By considering the amendment/substitution of sec. 10A and 10B vide Finance Act, 2000 w.e.f. 1/4/2001, Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court vide judgment in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. & others (341 ITR 385) has decided this issue in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The decision o f Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 391 ITR 274 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in paras 15 to 17 as under : “ 15. Sub-section 4 of Section 10A which provides for pro rata exemption, necess…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Carremen Silvercast

ITA/209/2016HC Karnataka20 Sept 2017

Bench: K.S.MUDAGAL,H.G.RAMESH

Section 260

…FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral): Sri K.V.Aravind, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants fairly submits that the question raised in this appeal is answered against the appellants by this Court in CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [(2012) 341 ITR 385 (Karn)]. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Appeal dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE LB…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Carremen Silvercast Clothing(I) Pvt Ltd

ITA/208/2016HC Karnataka20 Sept 2017

Bench: K.S.MUDAGAL,H.G.RAMESH

Section 260

Sh. Gautam R Chadha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5450/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Navin Chandra, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234B

…ting the gross total income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act 13 ITA No.5622/Del./2010 and not at the stage of computation of the total income under Chapter VI. Decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. [2012] 341 ITR 385 (Karn) affirmed on this point.” 16. So, following the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Yogokawa India Ltd. (supra), deduction u/s 10A is required to be taken before setting off brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation. Accordingly, Grounds No.5, 5.1 & 5.2 are determined in favour of the assessee and the AO is directed t…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Indium Software (India) Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2441/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri A.S. Sriraman, AdvocatesFor Respondent: 19.06.2017

Section 10ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘एस.एम.सी’ ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘SMC’ ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी,लेखा सद"य केसम" Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.2440 & 2441/Mds/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2009-10) The DCIT, Vs M/s. Indium Software (India) Ltd., No.41, VDS House, 2nd Floor, Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai – 34. Cathedral Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai – 600 086. PAN: AAACI6333F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri A.S. Sriraman, Advocates ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Responde…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Indium Software (India) Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2440/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Aug 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri A.S. Sriraman, AdvocatesFor Respondent: 19.06.2017

Section 10ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 43B

Hcl Technologies Bpo Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5622/DEL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Navin Chandra, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234B