What is Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India authority for?

For computing the deduction under Section 80M, only the net dividend income (gross dividend income after reducing expenses attributable to earning it, as per Section 57(iii) and the principle in Section 80AB) is eligible. The case also holds that tax authorities are not bound to perpetuate an error from a previous assessment year, as each year is a separate unit and consistency cannot override substantive justice.

How many judgments cite Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India?

229 judgments on BharatTax cite Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India (155 ITR 120), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 14A, Section 153A, Section 153D, Section 1961, Section 271(1)(c).

Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India (155 ITR 120)

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

…specific provision of section 35DD of the Act introduced. 4.7 As far plea of rule of consistency is concerned, we may like to refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Distributors (Baroda) P. Ltd. Vs. Union Of India & Ors. reported in 155 ITR 120, where it is observed if any wrong has been committed, same should not be perpetuated. The relevant observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court are reproduced as under: ITA Nos. 5524 & 5525/Del/2013 “28. But, even if, in our view, the decision in Cloth Traders' case (supra) is erroneous, the question still remains whether we should overturn it. Or…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Shri Sanjay Sawhney, Delhi

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

ITA 4857/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[A.Y 2009-10] The Income Tax Officer Vs. Shri Sanjay Sawhney Ward – 34(3) C – 83, Ashok Vihar New Delhi Phase – 1, Delhi

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT- DR

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153CSection 155

…t was framed u/s 153C of the Act. In our considered opinion, an error in the construction of any provision of the law cannot be allowed to perpetuate. The ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Distributors [Baroda] Vs. UOI and Two Others 155 ITR 120 is most relevant to quote, which reads as under; “We have given our most anxious consideration to this question, particularly since one of us, namely, P.N. Bhagwati, J. was a party to the decision in Cloth Traders case (supra). But having regard to various considerations to which we shall advert in detail when we examine the arguments advanced o…

Lahmeyer Holding Gmbh, Germany vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 5799/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2001-02] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon- 122002 Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2002-03] Lahmeyear Holding Gmbh Dcit, (Earlier Known As Lahmeyer Circle-3(2), International Gmbh), International Taxation, Friedberger Strasse 173 6118 New Delhi Bad Vilbel, Deutschland Germany Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2003-04] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon-

Section 115ASection 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 44D

…ot claim such benefit as a matter of right on the principle of consistency. In this regard it will be appropriate to refer to the decision of 35 M/s.LAHMEYER INTERNATIONAL GmbH Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Distributor (Baroda) P. Ltd v Union of India 155 ITR 120 (SC) their Lordship summarized their views at page 124 in following words:- “…..To perpetuate an error is no heroism. To rectify it is the compulsion of the judicial conscience. In this, we derivecomfort and strength from the wise and inspiring words of justice Bronson in Pierce v. Delameter (A.M.Y. at page 18):" a judge ought to be wise enough t…

M/S Lahmeyer International Gmbh, Gurgaon vs. ADIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2125/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2001-02] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon- 122002 Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2002-03] Lahmeyear Holding Gmbh Dcit, (Earlier Known As Lahmeyer Circle-3(2), International Gmbh), International Taxation, Friedberger Strasse 173 6118 New Delhi Bad Vilbel, Deutschland Germany Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2003-04] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon-

Section 115ASection 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 44D

…ot claim such benefit as a matter of right on the principle of consistency. In this regard it will be appropriate to refer to the decision of 35 M/s.LAHMEYER INTERNATIONAL GmbH Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Distributor (Baroda) P. Ltd v Union of India 155 ITR 120 (SC) their Lordship summarized their views at page 124 in following words:- “…..To perpetuate an error is no heroism. To rectify it is the compulsion of the judicial conscience. In this, we derivecomfort and strength from the wise and inspiring words of justice Bronson in Pierce v. Delameter (A.M.Y. at page 18):" a judge ought to be wise enough t…

M/S Lahmeyer International Gmbh, Gurgaon vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2124/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2001-02] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon- 122002 Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2002-03] Lahmeyear Holding Gmbh Dcit, (Earlier Known As Lahmeyer Circle-3(2), International Gmbh), International Taxation, Friedberger Strasse 173 6118 New Delhi Bad Vilbel, Deutschland Germany Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2003-04] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon-

Section 115ASection 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 44D

…ot claim such benefit as a matter of right on the principle of consistency. In this regard it will be appropriate to refer to the decision of 35 M/s.LAHMEYER INTERNATIONAL GmbH Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Distributor (Baroda) P. Ltd v Union of India 155 ITR 120 (SC) their Lordship summarized their views at page 124 in following words:- “…..To perpetuate an error is no heroism. To rectify it is the compulsion of the judicial conscience. In this, we derivecomfort and strength from the wise and inspiring words of justice Bronson in Pierce v. Delameter (A.M.Y. at page 18):" a judge ought to be wise enough t…

Lehmeyer International Gmbh vs. DCIT Circle 1 (2)

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1881/DEL/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2001-02] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon- 122002 Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2002-03] Lahmeyear Holding Gmbh Dcit, (Earlier Known As Lahmeyer Circle-3(2), International Gmbh), International Taxation, Friedberger Strasse 173 6118 New Delhi Bad Vilbel, Deutschland Germany Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2003-04] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon-

Section 115ASection 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 44D

…ot claim such benefit as a matter of right on the principle of consistency. In this regard it will be appropriate to refer to the decision of 35 M/s.LAHMEYER INTERNATIONAL GmbH Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Distributor (Baroda) P. Ltd v Union of India 155 ITR 120 (SC) their Lordship summarized their views at page 124 in following words:- “…..To perpetuate an error is no heroism. To rectify it is the compulsion of the judicial conscience. In this, we derivecomfort and strength from the wise and inspiring words of justice Bronson in Pierce v. Delameter (A.M.Y. at page 18):" a judge ought to be wise enough t…

Lahmeyer International Gmbh vs. ADIT, Circle-2(!)

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4960/DEL/2004[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2001-02] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon- 122002 Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2002-03] Lahmeyear Holding Gmbh Dcit, (Earlier Known As Lahmeyer Circle-3(2), International Gmbh), International Taxation, Friedberger Strasse 173 6118 New Delhi Bad Vilbel, Deutschland Germany Pan-Aaacl6802E Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2003-04] M/S Lahmeyer International Acit, Gmbh, Circle-2(1), C/O- Lahmeyer International International Taxation, (India) Private Limited, Drum Shaped Building, Intec House, 37, Institutional New Delhi Area, Sector-44, Gurgaon-

Section 115ASection 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 44D

…ot claim such benefit as a matter of right on the principle of consistency. In this regard it will be appropriate to refer to the decision of 35 M/s.LAHMEYER INTERNATIONAL GmbH Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Distributor (Baroda) P. Ltd v Union of India 155 ITR 120 (SC) their Lordship summarized their views at page 124 in following words:- “…..To perpetuate an error is no heroism. To rectify it is the compulsion of the judicial conscience. In this, we derivecomfort and strength from the wise and inspiring words of justice Bronson in Pierce v. Delameter (A.M.Y. at page 18):" a judge ought to be wise enough t…

M/S. Surendranagar District Co-Op. Milk Producers Union Ltd., Surendranagar vs. The DCIT, Surendranagr Circle, Surendranagar

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 262/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.262-263/Rjt/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) बनाम/ M/S.Surendranagar District D.C.I.T, Co-Op. Milk Producers Surendranagar Circle, Vs. Union Ltd. Surendranagar. Wadhwan City, Surendranagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaas8375B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitender Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 17/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Of Even Dated 12/01/2018, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 26/03/2015 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Ys) 20012-13 & 2013-14. Ita Nos.262-263/Rjt/2018 A.Y.S 2012-13 To 2013-14 First, We Take Up Ita No. 262/Rjt/2018 For A.Y. 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Kumar, DR

Section 194JSection 36Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 48Section 80P(2)(b)Section 80P(2)(d)

…n, if it is satisfied that such decision is manifestly wrong or proceeds upon a mistaken assumption in regard to the existence or continuance of a statutory provision or is contrary to another decision of the court - Distributors (Baroda) P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (SC) 155 ITR 120. (d) A patently wrong view taken in the past cannot be allowed to perpetuate on the basis of consistency - Indian Vaccines Corporation Ltd. Vs ITO 2010- TIOL-587-ITAT-DEL, Jat Education Society Vs DCIT (ITAT, Del) 10 taxmann.com 127 (e) Facts can be reconsidered in a later year and record different finding- Finding for earlier year not conclusive…

The ITO, Ward-2(2), Jamnagar vs. Smt. Shitalben Saurabh Vora, Jamnagar

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 651/RJT/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Sept 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.262-263/Rjt/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) बनाम/ M/S.Surendranagar District D.C.I.T, Co-Op. Milk Producers Surendranagar Circle, Vs. Union Ltd. Surendranagar. Wadhwan City, Surendranagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaas8375B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitender Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 17/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Of Even Dated 12/01/2018, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 26/03/2015 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Ys) 20012-13 & 2013-14. Ita Nos.262-263/Rjt/2018 A.Y.S 2012-13 To 2013-14 First, We Take Up Ita No. 262/Rjt/2018 For A.Y. 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Kumar, DR

Section 194JSection 36Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 48Section 80P(2)(b)Section 80P(2)(d)

…n, if it is satisfied that such decision is manifestly wrong or proceeds upon a mistaken assumption in regard to the existence or continuance of a statutory provision or is contrary to another decision of the court - Distributors (Baroda) P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (SC) 155 ITR 120. (d) A patently wrong view taken in the past cannot be allowed to perpetuate on the basis of consistency - Indian Vaccines Corporation Ltd. Vs ITO 2010- TIOL-587-ITAT-DEL, Jat Education Society Vs DCIT (ITAT, Del) 10 taxmann.com 127 (e) Facts can be reconsidered in a later year and record different finding- Finding for earlier year not conclusive…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 3327/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

…axmann.com 13 (Delhi) relied upon by the department to state that there is no heroism in perpetuating an error, it was submitted that the same is a general principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. Vs. Union of India : 155 ITR 120 and there is no quarrel to the said proposition. It was further pointed out that the said judgment has, in any case, been upset by the Hon’bleUttarakhand High Court vide order dated 03.06.2016 in ITA No. 08 of 2012 (copy supplied handout). III. Attribution to PE H. The Appellant submitted that it had already established that LG India is, both, t…

M/S. Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Noida

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 1946/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

…axmann.com 13 (Delhi) relied upon by the department to state that there is no heroism in perpetuating an error, it was submitted that the same is a general principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. Vs. Union of India : 155 ITR 120 and there is no quarrel to the said proposition. It was further pointed out that the said judgment has, in any case, been upset by the Hon’bleUttarakhand High Court vide order dated 03.06.2016 in ITA No. 08 of 2012 (copy supplied handout). III. Attribution to PE H. The Appellant submitted that it had already established that LG India is, both, t…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- Noida, International Taxation, Noida

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 6916/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

…axmann.com 13 (Delhi) relied upon by the department to state that there is no heroism in perpetuating an error, it was submitted that the same is a general principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in Distributors (Baroda) (P.) Ltd. Vs. Union of India : 155 ITR 120 and there is no quarrel to the said proposition. It was further pointed out that the said judgment has, in any case, been upset by the Hon’bleUttarakhand High Court vide order dated 03.06.2016 in ITA No. 08 of 2012 (copy supplied handout). III. Attribution to PE H. The Appellant submitted that it had already established that LG India is, both, t…

Baghpat Baraut Khekra Vikas Pradhikaran, Meerut vs. CIT, Meerut

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

ITA 3749/DEL/2011[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Mar 2019

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: Nil Baghpat Baraut Khekra Vs. Cit, Meerut Vikas Pradhikaran, Meerut Pan: Aaalb0713B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Vinod Goel, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Sanjay Goyal, Cit(Dr)

Section 10Section 12A

…he order for grant of registration on 30.09.2009. Therefore, the Ld. CIT is well within his power to decide the issue by his order in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of A. Distributors (Baroda) P. Ltd. vs. Union of India and Ors. 155 ITR 120 (SC). Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case and following our order in the case of M/s. Jalandhar Development Authority (supra) being on identical facts, the registration u/s 12AA cannot be granted to the assessee and the Ld. CIT has rightly cancelled the registration so granted. 7.4. Also, we concur with the views of the…

DCIT, Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Integrated Coal Mining Limited, Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 170/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11 Dcit, Circle-6(1), V/S. M/S Integrated Coal P-7, Chowringhee Mining Ltd., 6, Church Square, Kolkata-69 Lane, 1Ste Floor, Kolakta-700001 [Pan No.Aaaci 5584 L] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Dr. P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Diparun Mukherjee, Aca & ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Shri Alolk Goenka, Aca 15-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43B

…an spend he taxpayers’ money in pursuing litigation for the sake of it. 5.3.3 We are also reminded the observations of Hon'ble Justice P.N. Bhagwati while rendering the judgment in the case of Distributors (Baroda) P Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Otrs reported in 155 ITR 120 (SC) – larger bench decision as below:- ‘To perpetuate an error is no heroism. To rectify the same is the compulsion of judicial conscience.’ In the facts of the instant case, the assessee had commenced its operation from Asst Year 2003-04 and in the very first year, this issue was taken up for disallowance and the same was deleted by the Learned…

M/S. Vijay Industries vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-001581-001582 - 2005Supreme Court01 Mar 2019

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

Section 80H

…off against the income the business losses of the earlier years as required under Section 72 of the Act. xx xx xx 12. Having regard to the law as laid down by this Court in Distributors (Baroda) (P) Ltd. [(1986) 1 SCC 43 : 1986 SCC (Tax) 159 : (1985) 155 ITR 120] and H.H. Sir Rama Varma [1994 Supp (1) SCC 473 : (1994) 205 ITR 433] , it must be held that before considering the matter of deduction under Section 80-P(2) the Income Tax Officer had rightly set off the carried-forward losses of the earlier years in accordance with Section 72 of the Act and on finding that the said losses exceeded…