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.

Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT - 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 869/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2021AY 2012-13
Section 250Section 90Section 90nSection 91

…ITA No: 869/Mum/2018 Assessment year: 2012-13 Page 1 of 49 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘I’ BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar, Vice President, and, Vikas Awasthy Judicial Member] ITA No.: 869/Mum/2018 Assessment year: 2012-13 Bank of India …………………….. Appellant 8th floor, Star House, C 5 G Block, BKC, Bandra East, Mumbai 400 051 [PAN: AAACB0472C] Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai ………………….Respondent Appearances: C Naresh, for the appellant Sanjay Singh, for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : February 4, 2021 Date of pronouncing the order : March 4, 2021 O R D E R…

Loxim Industries Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT (OSD)-1, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

In the result, the captioned appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1564/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia, A.R
Section 10ASection 10BSection 250

…preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned counsel Mr. S. N. Divatia appearing for the assessee submitted at the outset that controversy herein is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. 391 ITR 274 (SC). Learned counsel further supported his case by the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs. Ace Software Exports Ltd. Tax Appeal No. 831 of 2012 judgment dated 01.03.2013 and Pr.CIT vs. Infosys BPO Ltd. [2021] 123 taxmann.com 216 (Karnataka). ITA No. 1564/Ahd/18 [Loxim Industries Ltd. vs. DCIT(OSD)] A.Y. 2011-12 - 5 -…

Biocon Limited vs. The Deputy

In the result, the impugned order dated 30

ITA/416/2014HC Karnataka12 Jan 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 10ASection 10BSection 14ASection 260Section 35

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY I.T.A. NO.416 OF 2014 BETWEEN: BIOCON LIMITED 20TH KM, HOSUR ROAD ELECTRONICS CITY P.O. BANGALORE-560100 REP. HEREIN BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER TAX & COMPLIANCE MR. B. SHIVADUTT. .... APPELLANT (BY MR. SURYANARAYANA T, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(2), C.R. BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU, JSS TOWERS, 100 FEET RING ROAD BAN…

M/S Wipro Limited vs. The Additional Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal is disposed of in terms of

ITA/315/2012HC Karnataka09 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 10ASection 14ASection 260Section 260ASection 36(1)(iv)Section 80

…n favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 10 7. Now we may advert to the second substantial question of law. From perusal of para 17 of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in ‘COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD.’, 391 ITR 274, we find that the second substantial question of law is also no longer res integra and has been answered in favour of the assessee by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the second substantial question of law is also answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Insofar as third substantial question of law is concerned, from perusal…

Pr Commissioner of vs. M/S Wipro Limited

In the result, the appeal is disposed of in terms

ITA/464/2017HC Karnataka09 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 10ASection 260Section 260ASection 32

…covery of tax from non resident payees was difficult. With regard to the claim of set off of STP unit losses of the assessee, it is 17 submitted that in view of decision of the Supreme Court in ‘COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD.’, 391 ITR 274, the losses of STP units, profits of taxable units cannot be set off against the profits of Section 10A / 10B units. Since, such losses can be considered and set off and carry forward only Section 70, 72 and 74 which comes under Chapter VI of the Act. Therefore, the assessing authority is right in denying set off losses to M.G.Road unit sin…

M/S. Kei Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, Ground No.3

ITA 528/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Satyan Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. D.R

…TA.No.528/D/2016 M/s. K.E.I. Industries Ltd., New Delhi. 12.3. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that ultimately the matter in issue have been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., Yokogawa India Ltd., [2017] 391 ITR 274 [SC] in Reference to Assessee’s SLP(C) No.18157/2015 as referred in para-14 of the Order which is reproduced as under : “14. The difference between the two expressions 'exemption' and 'deduction', though broadly may appear to be the same i.e., immunity from taxation, the practical effect of it in the light of the specific provisions contained in…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. K.E.I. Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Ground No.3

ITA 1433/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Satyan Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. D.R

…TA.No.528/D/2016 M/s. K.E.I. Industries Ltd., New Delhi. 12.3. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that ultimately the matter in issue have been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., Yokogawa India Ltd., [2017] 391 ITR 274 [SC] in Reference to Assessee’s SLP(C) No.18157/2015 as referred in para-14 of the Order which is reproduced as under : “14. The difference between the two expressions 'exemption' and 'deduction', though broadly may appear to be the same i.e., immunity from taxation, the practical effect of it in the light of the specific provisions contained in…

Elico Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

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

ITA 1120/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Nov 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1120/HYD/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Elico Limited, Asst. Commissioner HYDERABAD Vs of Income Tax, [PAN: AAACE5140L] Circle-2(2), HYDERABAD (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri S.Rama Rao, AR For Revenue : Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of Hearing : 12-11-2020 Date of Pronouncement : 18-11-2020 O R D E R PER D.S. SUNDER SINGH, A.M. : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of th…

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Infosys Bpo Ltd

ITA/351/2016HC Karnataka09 Nov 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 10ASection 14ASection 260

…our of the assessee. 4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the assessee that second substantial question of law is also answered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd.’, (2017) 391 ITR 274 (SC). The aforesaid fact could not be rebutted by the learned counsel for the revenue. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Yokogawa India Ltd. (supra), the second substantial question of law framed by a bench of this Court is also answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. 6 5. The t…

M/S. Mistral Software Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 1914/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Kannan Narayanan, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 154

…ITR 555 (SC), CIT Vs Mother India Refrigeration Inds (P) Ltd 155 ITR 711 (SC), CIT v Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd (1991) 191 ITR 0156 (Kar) explains the above principles. 9.6 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Yokogawa India Ltd [2017] 391 ITR 274 has held that deduction under section 10A should be computed and allowed while computing the income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act. Relevant observations from the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court are extracted hereunder. “17. If the specific provisions of the Act provide [first proviso to Sections 10A(1); 10A (1A) and 1…

M/S. Mistral Software Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 1913/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Nov 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Kannan Narayanan, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 154

…ITR 555 (SC), CIT Vs Mother India Refrigeration Inds (P) Ltd 155 ITR 711 (SC), CIT v Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd (1991) 191 ITR 0156 (Kar) explains the above principles. 9.6 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Yokogawa India Ltd [2017] 391 ITR 274 has held that deduction under section 10A should be computed and allowed while computing the income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act. Relevant observations from the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court are extracted hereunder. “17. If the specific provisions of the Act provide [first proviso to Sections 10A(1); 10A (1A) and 1…

M/S. Mistral Software Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 1912/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Nov 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Kannan Narayanan, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 154

…ITR 555 (SC), CIT Vs Mother India Refrigeration Inds (P) Ltd 155 ITR 711 (SC), CIT v Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd (1991) 191 ITR 0156 (Kar) explains the above principles. 9.6 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Yokogawa India Ltd [2017] 391 ITR 274 has held that deduction under section 10A should be computed and allowed while computing the income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act. Relevant observations from the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court are extracted hereunder. “17. If the specific provisions of the Act provide [first proviso to Sections 10A(1); 10A (1A) and 1…

M/S. Mistral Software Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 1911/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Nov 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Kannan Narayanan, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 154

…ITR 555 (SC), CIT Vs Mother India Refrigeration Inds (P) Ltd 155 ITR 711 (SC), CIT v Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd (1991) 191 ITR 0156 (Kar) explains the above principles. 9.6 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Yokogawa India Ltd [2017] 391 ITR 274 has held that deduction under section 10A should be computed and allowed while computing the income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act. Relevant observations from the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court are extracted hereunder. “17. If the specific provisions of the Act provide [first proviso to Sections 10A(1); 10A (1A) and 1…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt.Ltd

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

ITA/77/2015HC Karnataka02 Nov 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 115JSection 14ASection 2(45)Section 260Section 260ASection 709(1)

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.77 OF 2015 BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE. 2. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX RANGE-11, RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND: M/S. GOKALDAS IMAGES PVT. LTD., 7 & 12, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTHPURA BANGALORE-560022 PAN: AAACG 6637Q. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.…

DCIT, Circle- 8(1), New Delhi vs. Ebix Software India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5274/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT, DR
Section 10ASection 115J

…Manufacturers Ltd. v. CIT iv) 205 ITR 19 (Ker) Kerala State Cashew Dev. Corpn. v. CIT v) 213 ITR 660 (Bom) CIT v. Tyresoles Concessionaries Pvt. Ltd. vi) 212 ITR 1 (Bom) CIT v. Dandeli Ferro Alloy (P) Ltd.. vii) 160 ITD 540 (Asr) Aggarwal & Co. v. DCIT viii) 391 ITR 274 (SC) CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. (pages 443-444 of Paper Book) ix) 129 TTJ 273 (Chennai) Scientific Atlanta India Technology (P) Ltd. v. ACIT 40. So far as the various allegations/observations made by the AO are concerned, the ld. Counsel strongly challenged the same. So far as the observation that it is the first year that claim of deduction in…

Ocewen Financial Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 686/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A K Garodia & Shri George George K.

For Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 8

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A K GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.511/Bang/2016 Assessment year: 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. Ocwen Financial Solutions Pvt. Ltd., 6th Floor of Wing A & 5th Floor of of Income Tax, Circle 5(1)(2), Wing B, Block No.12, Bangalore. Pritech Park, Survey No.51064/4, Bellandur Village, Sarjapur Marathahalli Ring Road, Bengaluru – 560 103. PAN: AAACO 3764E APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.686/Bang/2016 Assessment year: 2011-12 Ocwen Financial Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Joint Commissioner…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Ocwen Financial Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

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

ITA 511/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A K Garodia & Shri George George K.

For Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 8

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A K GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.511/Bang/2016 Assessment year: 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. Ocwen Financial Solutions Pvt. Ltd., 6th Floor of Wing A & 5th Floor of of Income Tax, Circle 5(1)(2), Wing B, Block No.12, Bangalore. Pritech Park, Survey No.51064/4, Bellandur Village, Sarjapur Marathahalli Ring Road, Bengaluru – 560 103. PAN: AAACO 3764E APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.686/Bang/2016 Assessment year: 2011-12 Ocwen Financial Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Joint Commissioner…

M/S Karle Internatioal Private Ltd vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the order of the income tax appellate tribunal

ITA/377/2012HC Karnataka07 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 10BSection 10B(5)Section 234BSection 260Section 260ASection 70

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.377 OF 2012 BETWEEN: M/S. KARLE INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LTD, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS KARLE INTERNATIONAL) REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, MAHENDRA KARLE No.203/73, TUMKUR ROAD NAGASANDRA VILLAGE BANGALORE NORTH, BANGALORE-560022. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. A. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI. M. LAVA, ADV.,) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-6(1), NRUPATHUNGA ROAD R.P. BHAVAN, OPP. RESERVE…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Symphony Services Corporation

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

ITA/82/2013HC Karnataka02 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 10ASection 260

…hat the substantial question of law No.1 in both the appeals is covered by a decision of this Court in ‘YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD. Vs. CIT AND ORS.’ The aforesaid decision has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in ‘CIT AND ORS. Vs. YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD.’ (2017) 391 ITR 274 (SC). It is further submitted that the second substantial question of law in both the appeals is also covered by a decision of this Court rendered in ‘COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. TATA ELXI LTD.’ (2012) 349 ITR 98 (KAR) and the aforesaid view has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in ‘COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL-III Vs. HCL TE…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S.Symphony Services Corporation

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

ITA/83/2013HC Karnataka02 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 10ASection 260

…hat the substantial question of law No.1 in both the appeals is covered by a decision of this Court in ‘YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD. Vs. CIT AND ORS.’ The aforesaid decision has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in ‘CIT AND ORS. Vs. YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD.’ (2017) 391 ITR 274 (SC). It is further submitted that the second substantial question of law in both the appeals is also covered by a decision of this Court rendered in ‘COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. TATA ELXI LTD.’ (2012) 349 ITR 98 (KAR) and the aforesaid view has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in ‘COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL-III Vs. HCL TE…