CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.

391 ITR 274Supreme Court of India2017#271 most cited

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

Deduction under Section 10A or 10AA of the Income-tax Act is computed on the profits of the eligible unit without first setting off losses from other units or non-eligible units. Conversely, losses incurred by an eligible unit are allowed to be set off against the assessee's other taxable business profits.

290

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 10A · Section 10AA · Section 70 · set off of losses · eligible unit deduction · profits of SEZ unit · losses of other units · computation of 10A deduction · set off losses of 10AA units · gross total income

Also reported as

77 Taxmann.com 41291 CTR 1244 Taxmann 273

Sections most often in play

Section 10ASection 10AASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 115JBSection 139(5)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 70section 10aset off of lossessection 10bsection 10aasection 80hhunabsorbed depreciationsection 80hhccomputer softwaretested partyeligible businessgross total income

Judgments citing CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.

Evalueserve.Com Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 6310/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…T 49/162 Taxman 119 (Bang.). 34. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on the record. This issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. (2017) 391 ITR 274. The Hon’ble Apex Court held as under: “12. We have considered the submissions advanced and the provisions of Section 10A as it stood prior to the amendment made by Finance Act, 2000 with effect from 1.4.2001; the amended Section 10Athereafter and also the amendment made by Finance Act, 2003 with retrospective effect from 1.4.2001. 13. The reten…

Aithent Technologies Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1564/DEL/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri Atul Ninawat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT, DR
Section 144CSection 254

…m. 6. We have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. It is found that the issue raised herein is no more res integra in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT & Anr vs. Yokogawa India Ltd (2017) 391 ITR 274 (SC), in which it has been held that the deduction contemplated is qua the eligible undertaking standing on its own and without reference to the other eligible or non- eligible units or undertakings of the assessee. It has further been held that the stage of deduction would be while computing the gross total income of the eligible undertaking u…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Cummins Research & Technology India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2073/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: "याियक सद"य के सम" Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2073/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 10ASection 115J

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण बी बी” "यायपीठ पुणे म" । बी "यायपीठ पुणे म" । "यायपीठ पुणे म" । "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE "ी डी डी डी. क"णाकरा राव डी लेखा सद"य, एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी, "याियक सद"य के सम" "ी "ी "ी क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा राव,लेखा सद"य क"णाकरा राव लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी "याियक सद"य के सम" "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE "याियक सद"य के सम" SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 2073/PUN/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं…

Accenture Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 7686/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwallaa/wFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 92C

…ubmitted that deduction under section 10A of the Act has to be allowed unit–wise from the gross total income and thereafter loss has to be set off. In this context he relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v/s Yokogawa India Ltd., [2017] 391 ITR 274 (SC). 57. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations of the DRP and the Assessing Officer. 58. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. The dispute between the assessee and the Department is limited to the issue as to whether deduction under section 10A of the Act has to be allowed from the…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Mindteck (India) Limited

ITA/332/2015HC Karnataka17 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 10ASection 260

…1/13 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2018 PRESENT THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA I.T.A.No.332/2015 BETWEEN : 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX C.R. BUILDINGS, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE-560001 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(1), BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADV.) AND : M/s MINDTECK (INDIA) LIMITED, 16/3, CAMBRIDGE ROAD, ULSOOR, BANGALORE-560 009, PAN: AAACH 1072Q …RESPONDENT (BY SRI S.SANKARA NARAYANAN, ADV.) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax CIT(A) vs. M/S Ids Software Solutions India Pvt. Ltd

ITA/499/2017HC Karnataka02 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 10ASection 260

…1/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2018 PRESENT THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA I.T.A.No.499/2017 BETWEEN : 1. THE Pr. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIT[A] 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU-560095. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-11[4], PRESENT ADDRESS ACIT, CIRCLE-3[1][1] 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA BENGALURU-560095. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s. IDS SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS…

Pr Commissioner of vs. M/S Telelogic India Pvt Ltd

ITA/550/2016HC Karnataka28 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 10ASection 260

…1/17 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 PRESENT THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA I.T.A.No.550/2016 BETWEEN : 1. Pr. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 BMTC COMPLEX, KORMANGALA BANGALORE 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-12(4) BANGALORE ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADV.) AND : M/s TELELOGIC INDIA PVT. LTD., C/O IBM INDIA PVT. LTD., 3RD FLOOR, SUBRAMANYA ARCADE NO.12, BANNERGHATTA MAIN ROAD BANGALORE, PAN:AABCT3272D …RESPONDENT (BY SRI M…

ACIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai vs. Tenneco Automative India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3226/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.3226/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) The Acit, Vs M/S. Tenneco Automotive India Corporate Circle 3(1), Pvt. Ltd., Tidel Park, Di South, 9Th Floor, Chennai – 34. 4, Canal Road, Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. Pan: Aabct3125D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 17.05.2018
Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)

…s.10A will be allowable to the eligible units only after setting off of the loss of other non-eligible units. 5. However, on appeal, the Ld.CIT relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT & Othrs. Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd., reported in 391 ITR 274 vide order dated 16.12.2016 decided the issue in favour of the assessee by observing as under: 10. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the later judgement by the Supreme Court in the case of Yokogawa India Ltd., declared a clear pronunciation of law as against the dismissal of the SLP in the case of Himatasingike Seide Ltd. Though the S…

Servion Global Solutions Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO (OSD), Chennai

ITA 1224/CHNY/2015[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2018AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Respondent: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 35DSection 80H

…rding to him, such set off of profit /loss between two units could not be done, since deduction u/s.10A of the Act was to be given on a stand alone basis. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd, (391 ITR 274). 37. Per contra, ld. Departmental Representative fairly agreed that the issue stood covered in favour of the assessee. We have heard the counsels. By virtue of the judgment of 38. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Yokogawa India Ltd, (supra) which affirmed the judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court, in the same case, deduction u/s.10A of t…

Servion Global Solutions Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

ITA 1223/CHNY/2015[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2018AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Respondent: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 35DSection 80H

…rding to him, such set off of profit /loss between two units could not be done, since deduction u/s.10A of the Act was to be given on a stand alone basis. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd, (391 ITR 274). 37. Per contra, ld. Departmental Representative fairly agreed that the issue stood covered in favour of the assessee. We have heard the counsels. By virtue of the judgment of 38. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Yokogawa India Ltd, (supra) which affirmed the judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court, in the same case, deduction u/s.10A of t…

Strides Arcolab Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Asst Cir 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8614/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Strides Shasun Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Strides Income Tax Circle 10(3), Arcolab Limited) 201, Mumbai Vs. Devavrata, Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aadcs8104P

For Appellant: Percy J. Pardiwala &For Respondent: Jayant Kumar &
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 1O

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Strides Shasun Limited The Asst. Commissioner of (formerly known as Strides Income Tax Circle 10(3), Arcolab Limited) 201, Mumbai Vs. Devavrata, Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AADCS8104P Assessee by : Percy J. Pardiwala & Nitesh Josi, ARs’ Revenue by : Jayant Kumar & V. Jenardhanan, DR’s Date of hearing: 12-03-2018 Date of pronouncement : 08-06-2018 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Dispute Resolution Pane…

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

ITA/842/2017HC Karnataka10 Apr 2018

Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV,B.S PATIL

Section 10ASection 260Section 260A

…nt in 3 the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. YOKOGAWA INDIA LIMITED – (341) ITR 385. Indeed, this judgment rendered by this Court has been upheld by the Apex Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. YOKOGAWA INDIA LIMITED – (2017) 391 ITR 274. 3. In the light of the above, as both the questions involved in the present appeal have been covered by the judgments rendered by this Court and in fact the second question which is sought to be raised has been covered by the decision of the Apex Court, as fairly submitted at the bar by the learned counsel for both parties this matte…

Trizetto Services India Private Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2537/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. Venkatachalam &For Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 10ASection 115JSection 32(2)

…Ld. Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to the grounds and submitted that Ground Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are linked and the same need to be decided in the light of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court’s judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. 391 ITR 274 (SC). Reading out the relevant portions from the said judgment, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the said judgment has brought out finality on the contentions of issues relating to the claim of deduction u/s.10A of the Act and the stage of computation of the deduction if the same is done after the set off of the brought forward los…

M/S.Akay Flavours & Aromatics P. Ltd, Ernakulam vs. The ACIT, Ernakulam

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesseee is allowed as indicated

ITA 491/COCH/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Feb 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year : 2004-05

Section 10ASection 10BSection 139(1)Section 143Section 32(2)Section 72

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, AM & GEORGE GEORGE K., JM Assessment Year : 2004-05 M/s. Akay Flavours & Aromatics (P) Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Ltd., Ambunad, Income-tax, Circle-2(1), Kochi. Malaidamthuruthu P.O., Aluva, Ernakulam-683 561. [PAN:AACCA 6827A] (Assessee-Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Assessee by Shri K.M. Jose, CA Revenue by Shri A. Dhanaraj, Sr. DR Date of hearing 01/02/2018 05th/02/2018 Date of pronouncement O R D E R Per GEORGE GEORGE K.,JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed again…

Firstsource Solutions Ltd ( Formerly Known As Icici Onesource Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2658/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 154

…eard the parties on this issue. This issue has since been decided in favour of the assessee by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Black & Veatch Consulting P Ltd (348 ITR 72) and by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd (391 ITR 274). Accordingly we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to allow deduction u/s 10A of the Act without setting off of loss from non-STP units. 33. In Ground No.8, the assessee contends that the Ld CIT(A) should have directed the AO to allow deduction u/s 10A as claimed by the assessee. This ground, being general i…

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

ITA/843/2017HC Karnataka05 Jan 2018

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

Section 260

…of law is answered against the appellants by this Court in CIT v. Tata Elxsi Ltd. [(2012) 349 ITR 98 (Karn)] and the second substantial question of law is answered against the appellants by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [(2017) 391 ITR 274 (SC)]. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Appeal dismissed. Sd/- ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE hkh.…

Infosys Bpo Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner

ITA/236/2016HC Karnataka06 Dec 2017

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

Section 260

…JUDGMENT Ag.CJ (Oral): Sri K.V.Aravind, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents fairly submits that the questions raised in this appeal are answered in favour of the appellant by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [(2017) 391 ITR 274 (SC)]. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 09.12.2015 (Annexure-E) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘‘B’’ Bench, Bangalore in ITA No.236/2016 -3- ITA.No.1004/Bang/2014 is set asid…

M/S. Synergy Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. JCIT, Range-3, Kolkata, Asansol

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2004/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 2004/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Synergy Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. ..............................………………Appellant C/O. Arsk & Associates, Chartered Accountants, 22, R.N. Mukherjee Road, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaufs3471M] J.C.I.T., Range 3, Parmar Bldgs.……………………………………………….......Respondent 54, G.T. Road, Asansol - 713304 Appearances By: Shri V.N. Purohit, Fca & Shri H.V. Bhardwaj, Aca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 09, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The 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 & The Grievance Of The Assessee Is Projected Therein By Way Of The Following Solitary Ground: “Considering The Facts Of The Case & 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 & Business Loss Brought Forward From Earlier.” 2. The Assessee In The Present Case Is A Company Which Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Solar Photovoltaic Modules Etc.

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)

…th 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 holdi…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH ‘A’ BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(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 PER SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOU…

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

…learned Departmental Representative relied on the order of the assessment. The learned AR, on the other hand, submitted that the issue in question is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [(2017) 391 ITR 274 (SC)]. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Assessing Officer had allowed deduction u/s 10A in respect of profits of STPI Unit at Bangalore after setting off the loss incurred by STPI Unit at Mumbai. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Yokogawa India Ltd. (supra) had categorically held that profits of…