“Section 72(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 72Section 72(1)32 judgments

CHARANBIR SINGH SETHI,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19,, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2774/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalcharanbir Singh Sethi Vs. Acit, Central Circle-19 Ar-717, The Aralias, Dlf Ara Centre, Golf Links, Dlf City, Jhandewalan, Phase-V, Gurgaon New Delhi – 110055 Haryana – 122009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aasps9437K Appellant .. Respondent Amrit Pal Singh Chadha Vs. Acit, Central Circle 19 4410, Dlf Phase-V, Ara Centre, Kutub Enclave, Gurgaon Jhandewalan, Haryana – 122002 New Delhi – 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aewpc3215P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Amarjit Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr

Section 102(2)Section 143(1)

P a g e | 1 ITA Nos. 2774 & 2773/Del/2025 Charanbir Singh Sethi & Amrit Pal Singh Chadha (AY: 2013-14) IN

AMRIT PAL SINGH CHADHA,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19,, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2773/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Amarjit Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr

Section 102(2)Section 143(1)

P a g e | 1 ITA Nos. 2774 & 2773/Del/2025 Charanbir Singh Sethi & Amrit Pal Singh Chadha (AY: 2013-14) IN

PONNAPULA SULOCHANA, L/R OF LATE PONNAPULA SANJEEVA PARTHASARATHY,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

ITA 295/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153DSection 80

pursuance of a return filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 139(3) shall be carry forward and set off under Section 72(1) or 73(2) or 74(1) of the Act. In other words, as per the provisions of Section 80 of the Act, loss cannot

PONAPULA SULOCHANA LR LATE P SANJEEVA PARTHASARATHY,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

ITA 294/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153DSection 80

HEWLETT PACKARD FINANCIAL SERVICES (INDIA) P. LTD,BANGALORE vs. ASST CIT CIR 2(1)(2), BANGALURU

Accordingly, the ground is dismissed as not pressed

ITA 915/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm &\Nms Padmavathy S, Am\Ni.T.A. No. 915/Mum/2017\N(Assessment Year: 2011-12)\Nhewlett Packard Financial\Nservices (India) Pvt. Ltd.,\N24, Salarpuria Arena, Hosur Main\Nroad, Adugodi, Bangalore-560030.\Npan: Aabcc5967C\Nappellant)\Nassessee By\Nrevenue By\Ndate Of Hearing\Ndate Of Pronouncement\Nacit, Circle-2(1)(2),\Naayakar Bhavan,\Nvs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020.\N:\N:\N:\N:\Nrespondent)\Nshri Percy Pardiwala &\Nmr. Ninad Patade, Ar\Nshri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. Dr\N22.09.2025\N21.10.2025\Norder\Nper Padmavathy S, Am:\Nthis Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of\Nincome Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai [In Short 'Cit(A)'] Passed Under Section 250 Of\Nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Dated 25.10.2016 For Assessment Years (Ay)\N2011-12. The Assessee Raised Grounds Pertaining To The Following Issues:\N(I) Disallowance Of Claim Of Depreciation On \"Hp Indigo Digital Press\Nprinter\" @ 60% - Ground No. 1.1 To 1.7\N(Ii) Treatment Of Ceased Liability As Income U/S 41 - Ground No. 2.1 To\N2.9\N(Iii) Disallowance Of Set Off Of Unabsorbed Depreciation - Ground\Nno. 3.1 To 3.9\N(Iv) Disallowance Of Provision For Tds Certificates & Addition To\Nbook Profits U/S.115Jb - Ground No.

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 41

intimation of loss by the AO in the course assessment we notice that the\nsaid section provides for intimation of various losses under section 72(1), section\n73(2), section 74 (1) / 74(3) or section 74A(3) but does not talk about the\nunabsorbed depreciation under section

PRADEEP KISANLAL BOOB,NASHIK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, NASHIK, NASHIK

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

ITA 189/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.189/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

Section 134Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

move on to the provision it provides for carry forward and set off of business losses provided u/s.72 of the Act, and Section 72(1)(i) provides that brought forward business losses can be set off against the profits and gains, if any, of any business or profession carried ... assessable for that assessment year. Section 72(1)(ii) provides that losses which cannot be wholly so set off the amount of losses not so set off shall be carry forward to the following assessment years which shall not exceed eight assessment years subject to the proviso to section 72

ADITYA CEMENT,BEHROR vs. ITO, BEHROR

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

ITA 1491/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anand Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR a

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 68Section 72(1)

Alwar other sources in return of income filed as well as in the computation of income for the year under consideration . As per section 72(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, brought forwarded business losses can not be set off against the income other than income from business profession. Section

ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, INTL, TAX 1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1240/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Section 115ASection 195(2)Section 250Section 44BSection 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90

clearly\nmentioned that Section 44BB is a presumptive scheme for the\ncomputation of Business or Profession Income. Reference is also\ninvited to Section 72(1) referred to in sub-section 4 of 44BB, which\nprovides for Carry Forward and Setting off of Business Losses. Also,\nit is emphasized that

HOTEL AYODHYA,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 150/PUN/2025[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2025

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 32(2)Section 72Section 72(1)Section 73

shown loss from business and income from other sources which was correctly computed as per ROI filed. As per provisions of Clause (i) section 72(1) of the Act, the carried forward business loss (which comprises of unabsorbed depreciation) can be carried forward and set off against the profit ... loss. Once it takes the colour of current year depreciation then it becomes eligible for set-off against other income as provided in section 72(1) of the Act. The above provisions is squarely applicable in the facts of the instant case and, therefore, the claim of the assessee

SUVINO TELEVIDEO,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 25(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the above terms

ITA 2099/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 32(2)Section 72Section 72(1)Section 72(2)

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nMUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI\nBEFORE MS. PADMAVATHY S., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI

SHRI GAYATRI CONSTRUCTIONS,NELLORE vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, NELLORE

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

ITA 294/HYD/2024[AY 2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2025

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153DSection 80

CHANDRASHEKAR HEMANTH ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 7(2)(4) BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1677/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar E, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69ASection 80

Ld.CIT(A) had misunderstood the provision and on that basis, rejected the claim of set off which is not correct. The sections 72(1), 73(2), 73A(2), 74(1) or (3) and 74A(3) and 80 of the Act were relied on by the Ld.AR and contended that ... were determined by the AO and therefore the said losses can be carried forward upto a period of 8 years as stated in sections 72(1), 73(2), 73A(2), 74(1) or (3) and 74A(3) and 80 of the Act. In the present case on hand

LIMAGRAIN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 464/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. (Accountant Member), Shri K. Narasimha Chary (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.Srinivasulu, ARFor Respondent: : Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

business losses against income from business. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that although the appellant has satisfied the conditions as per section 72(1) of the Act, but the Assessing Officer has not allowed set off of brought forward business losses against the income from business ... income is a matter of fact which needs to be verified, with reference to the conditions prescribed for setting off losses as per section 72(1) of the Act. The fact with regard to the relevant dates and events is not available before us and it needs to be verified

T V SUNDARAM IYENGAR & SONS LIMITED,MADURAI vs. DCIT, CC - 2, , MADURAI

Appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1803/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1803/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-2014. M/S. T.V. Sundram Iyengar & The Deputy Commissioner Sons Private Limited, Vs. Of Income Tax, No.7B, Tvs Building, Corporate Circle 2, West Veli Street. Madurai. Madurai 625 001. Pan: Aabct 0159K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35DSection 391

Paras 5.4-5.5, Page 30-31. The ld. PCIT observed that the AO did not examine this important issue with reference to section 72(1) of the Act during the course of assessment. The ld. PCIT further dealt with the issue of item No.23(c) of the annual report ... from income from house property which is not permissible under the law. The Assessing Officer failed to examine this claim with reference to section 72(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, such lack of enquiry and allowance of incorrect claim renders the assessment order erroneous as well

VALUABLE TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAC (APPEALS)-11 PUNE , PUNE

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

ITA 645/MUM/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2020-21 Valuable Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Cit(A)-11, Dcit Central Circle 1 Plot No. 53/1 Media Info Park, Road, Thane, Ashok It Park 6Th Floor, No.7, Midc, Near Akruti Trade Vs. Ward No. -16, Wagle Industrial Centre, Andheri (East), Estate, Thane (West)-400604. Mumbai-400093. Pan No. Aaccv 2732 P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Jagdish Shetty

Section 154Section 43BSection 72(1)Section 74

earlier years against the income from capital gains u/s 74 of the Income Tax Act and disallowing the same under section 72(1) of the Income Tax Act and disallowing the same under section 72(1) of the Income Tax Act and disallowing the same under section 72(1 ... this connection, it is seen that as per the . In this connection, it is seen that as per the provisions of section 72(1) of the Act, the unabsorbed business provisions of section 72(1) of the Act, the unabsorbed business provisions of section 72(1

MEENAKSHI ENERGY AND INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 291/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.291/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Meenakshi Energy & Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Infrastructure Holdings (P) Circle 5 (1) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafcm6917L (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate Shri A.V. Raghuram रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri K.Meghanath Chowhan,(Cit)Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/05/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 27/06/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocate Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: : Shri K.Meghanath Chowhan,(CIT)DR

Section 72(1)

interest income has been rightly assessed under the head business income and also brought forward losses has been rightly claimed in terms of section 72(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Page 3 of 13 ITA No 291 of 2024 Meenakshi Energy and Infrastructure Holdings P Ltd 4. The Assessing ... under the head “income from other sources”. The Assessing Officer had also denied the set of brought forward business losses in terms of section 72(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on the ground that brought forward business losses can be set off against business income only. 5. Being aggrieved

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, , KALYAN vs. M/S ASB INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1541/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandip Singh Karhaildcit, C-1,Kalyan Vs. M/S. Asb International 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, Pvt. Ltd. Mayale Naar, E9, E44, Addl. Kalyan(W)- 421301 Ambernath, Industrial Area, Anand Nagar, Ambernath Thane-421506 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaaca8424F Appellant .. Respondent C.O. No. 65/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri. Paras SavlaFor Respondent: Shri. Ajay Chandra

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 250

income post-tax holiday period. 24 Chapter VI deals with the aggregation of income and set off or carry for-ward of loss. Section 72(1) deals with the carry forward and set off of business loss which reads as under: 72.(1) Where for any assessment year

OMM SHREE REALCON PVT. LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. PR.CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 97/CTK/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & And Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2018-19 Om Shree Realcon Pvt Ltd., Om Shree Realcon Pvt Ltd., Vs. Pr. Cit- Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-1 Plot No.418, Forest Park, 8, Forest Park, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabco 3118 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ca S.K.Sarangi, Ca Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. Cit (Osd) Pr. Cit (Osd) Date Of Hearing : 28 /0 06/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28 /0 /06/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Sarangi, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. CIT (OSD)

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 263Section 68

recorded that the Assessing Officer had failed to conduct the required enquiry and also had failed in application of the provisions of section 72(1) of the I.T. Act. This rendered order passed by the Assessing Officer erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue to that extent. The Tribunal

DHARAMPAL PEMCHAND LTD. ,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, DELHI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 82/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudharysl. Ita No(S) Assessment Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 4300/Del/2018 2013-14 Dharampal Premchand Ltd. Dcit 4873, Chandni Chowk, Central Circle – 29 Delhi-110 006 New Delhi Pan : Aaacd 1952 B 2. 2907/Del/2018 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. -Do- -Do- 6014/Del/2019 2016-17 4. 82/Del/2022 2017-18 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri G. N. Gupta, Adv. Revenue By Shri Harpal Singh Kharab, Sr. D.R Date Of Hearing: 21.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.03.2023

Section 10(34)Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. NARENDER

DHARAMPAL PREMCHAND LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6014/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Section 10(34)Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. NARENDER

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2