← All Phrases

“gross total income”

Chapter VI - Deductions / Set-offSection 80B(5)Section 80B(5) / Rule 3D2,282 judgments

The decision most relied on for gross total income is CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State (200 Taxmann 220), cited in 348 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on gross total income

CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State
200 Taxmann 220 · 2011 · High Court
348
citing judgments

Interest earned by a Co-operative Society from investing fixed deposits in banks is entitled to a deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.
391 ITR 274 · 2017 · Supreme Court
290
citing judgments

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.

ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. v. CIT
343 ITR 89 · 2012 · Supreme Court
144
citing judgments

For calculation of deduction under Section 80HHC, if total interest is netted off after adjusting interest paid and received, the 90% reduction specified in Explanation (baa) is not applicable.

Synco Industries Ltd. v. Assessing Officer (IT) & Another
299 ITR 444 · 2008 · Supreme Court
82
citing judgments

When computing deductions under Chapter VI-A, such as Section 80IA, losses from other business undertakings must be set off against the profits of the eligible undertaking before calculating the deduction. No deduction under Section 80IA is permissible if the overall 'Profits & Gains of Business or Profession' results in a loss.

CIT v. Himatasingike Seide Ltd.
286 ITR 255 · 2006 · High Court
73
citing judgments

Deduction under Section 10A of the Income-tax Act is to be allowed only after setting off unabsorbed depreciation and brought forward business losses against the profits of the business.

CIT v. Williamson Financial Services
165 Taxmann 638 · 2007 · Supreme Court
67
citing judgments

Income-tax is levied on the total income of an assessee, not on gross receipts. The tax is on income, and deductions for expenditure are permissible.

CIT v. Reliance Energy Limited
127 Taxmann.com 69 · 2021 · Supreme Court
47
citing judgments

Deduction under Section 80-IA or 80-IB is computed by setting it off against the gross total income to arrive at the total income of an assessee.

CIT v. Tridoss Laboratories Ltd.
328 ITR 448 · 2010 · High Court
35
citing judgments

Deductions under Chapter VI-A of the Income Tax Act, such as Section 80-IA, are to be calculated and allowed with reference to the assessee's gross total income, not just business income.

Judgments citing gross total income

Ramee Hotels Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6 2 Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4300/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri. Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal
Section 1Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

Para 4 above in Para 4 above II Income from Other Sources Income from Other Sources 19,46, 276/ 19,46, 276/- Gross Total Income Gross Total Income 5,64,82,119/ 5,64,82,119/- Set off Brought Forward Loss Set off Brought Forward Loss

Ramee Hotels Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4298/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri. Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal
Section 1Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

Para 4 above in Para 4 above II Income from Other Sources Income from Other Sources 19,46, 276/ 19,46, 276/- Gross Total Income Gross Total Income 5,64,82,119/ 5,64,82,119/- Set off Brought Forward Loss Set off Brought Forward Loss

Ramee Hotels Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6 2 Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4297/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri. Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal
Section 1Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

Para 4 above in Para 4 above II Income from Other Sources Income from Other Sources 19,46, 276/ 19,46, 276/- Gross Total Income Gross Total Income 5,64,82,119/ 5,64,82,119/- Set off Brought Forward Loss Set off Brought Forward Loss

Ramee Hotels Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6 2 Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4295/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri. Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal
Section 1Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

Para 4 above in Para 4 above II Income from Other Sources Income from Other Sources 19,46, 276/ 19,46, 276/- Gross Total Income Gross Total Income 5,64,82,119/ 5,64,82,119/- Set off Brought Forward Loss Set off Brought Forward Loss

Ramee Hotels Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6 2 Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4293/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024AY 2018-19
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

lease hold land (as discussed in Para 4 above Income from Other Sources 19,46, 276/- Gross Total Income 5,64,82,119/- Set off Brought Forward Loss 41,26,863/- (Ay 2012-13) (1,70,53,245/- minus 1,29,26,382/-) Set off Brought Forward Loss

Teddy Toy Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 8(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1793/KOL/2024[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2024AY 2023-2024

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A), The Assessee Submitted That Due To An Oversight Claim U/S 801Jjaa Of The Act Was Tendered Instead Of U/S 80Iac Of The Act. However, The Ld. Cit(A) Found That In Clause 33 Of The Audit Report (Form 3Cd) The Claiming Of Deduction U/S 80Jjaa Of The Act Was Mentioned. Also, The Procedural Formalities Pertaining To Any Claim U/S

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 801JSection 80ISection 80J

unlawful, unwarranted, against natural justice and bad in law. 2. Your Appellant submits that disallowance of the claim of deduction from the Gross Total Income u/s 80JJAA (wrong Section chosen instead of section 80IAC) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 be directed to be allowed. [Relief claimed - deletion of arbitrary

Bansal Foundation, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(2), Exemption, Kolkata

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

ITA 107/KOL/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 107/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Bansal Foundation,………………………………Appellant 119, Park Street, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700016 [Pan:Aadtb0630J] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-1(2), Exemption, Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Ms. Puja Somani, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Nicholash Murmu, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: November 13, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 10, 2024 O R D E R

Section 1Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

Return of income for the assessment year 2018-19 was filed under section 1 Bansal Foundation 139(1) of the Act declaring gross total income of Rs.2,59,042/-, which was assessed at Rs.26,50,000/-. Ld. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru has made an adjustment of Rs.17,90,958/- under section

Sunitha, Coimbatore vs. PCIT -1, Coim, Batore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2013/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2013/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-2019) Sunitha, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No.30, Sivaji Colony, Income Tax -1, Thadagam Road, Coimbatore Edayarpalayam, Coimbatore 641 025. [Pan: Bhqps 4789G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.11.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, IRS, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 69

CASS’ citing reasons for selection as “The assessee has given large amount of loans as per Form 3CD of debtors in comparison to Gross Total Income shown in the ITR”. The assessment order was passed by faceless assessing officer (‘FAO’ in short) on 20/04/2021 accepting the income retuned ... CASS" citing reason for selection as "The assessee has given large amount of loans as per Form 3CD of debtors in comparison to Gross Total Income shown in the ITR." Statutory notice u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the I.T.Act,61 were generated and served upon the assessee through electronic

Samarth Surksha Rakshak Co-Op Credit Society Ltd, Sanpada vs. Income Tax Officer, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 5495/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am Samarth Surksha Rakshak Co-Op Income Tax Officer, Credit Society Ltd., Navi Mumbai Shop No. 23, Shantiniketan Housing Vs. Society, 30/A, Balaji Tower, Sanpada East, Thane, Maharashtra – 400705 Pan/Gir No. Aadas3793G (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Prashant GhumareFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

adjudication of the issue before us. "80P(2)(d) (1). Where in the case of an assessee being a co-operative society, the gross total income includes any income referred to in sub-section (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section

Shyamal Kumar Ghosh, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 33(5), Kolkata

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

ITA 1813/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1813/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shyamal Kumar Ghosh……………………………………………….…..……Appellant 40, Weston Street, 2Nd Floor, Bowbazar, Kolkata – 700013. [Pan: Adtpg3720F] Vs. Ito, Ward-33(5), Kolkata............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhishek Bansal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Akhil Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 09, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 12.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Raised Issue Of A Delay Of 198 Days In Filing The Instant Appeal. The Assessee Has Submitted An Application For Condonation Of Delay Citing Valid & Proper Reasons. After Considering The Averments Made In The Application, We Condone The Delay. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 By Declaring Gross Total Income Of Rs.14,15,352/- & Total Income Of Rs.12,49,520/- After Deduction Under Chapter Vi-A Of The Act. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued. In Response, The Assessee Submitted Profit & Loss A/C, Balance Sheet And

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 by declaring gross total income of Rs.14,15,352/- and total income of Rs.12,49,520/- after deduction under chapter VI-A of the Act. The case of the assessee

Robert Bosch Engineering and Business Solutions Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Large Tax Payers Unit, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 593/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar E, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 115Section 115JSection 237Section 80J

requirements emerges to be fulfilled in order to claim deduction under the section: 1. The Assessee should be an Indian Company and the gross total income of the Assessee should include profits and gains derived from any industrial undertaking engaged in the manufacture or production . IT(TP)A No.446 & 593/Bang/2020

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2, Ltu, Bengaluru vs. M/S. Robert Bosch Engineering and Business Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 446/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar E, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 115Section 115JSection 237Section 80J

requirements emerges to be fulfilled in order to claim deduction under the section: 1. The Assessee should be an Indian Company and the gross total income of the Assessee should include profits and gains derived from any industrial undertaking engaged in the manufacture or production . IT(TP)A No.446 & 593/Bang/2020

Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy.C.I.T., Cent.Cir.44, Mumbai

In the result, the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1387/MUM/2009[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2024AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sawana, Adv., Ms. Neha Sharma & Shri Apurva Chudhry, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya, CIT, D/R
Section 80I

understood here that Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court has taken a consistent stand that in view of Section 80A(2) where the gross total income of the assessee computed as per the Section 80B(5) is NIL or is negative figure, no deduction is allowable U/s. 80J/ 80I / 80IA ... chemical division while considering the question whether deductions under sections 80HH and 80-I were allowable. The Assessing Officer noticed that the gross total income of the appellant before deductions under Chapter VI-A was 'nil'. Therefore, he concluded that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit of deductions

Kay Power and Paper Limited, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Satara

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

ITA 1437/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani KumarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 148A

taxable profit for the year under consideration is Rs.52,91,606/- which is set off against brought forward unabsorbed depreciation and therefore, the gross total income is Nil. It was submitted that even after setting off of current year loss, the unabsorbed depreciation is of Rs.31

Kay Power and Paper Limited, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Satara

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

ITA 1436/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani KumarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 148A

taxable profit for the year under consideration is Rs.52,91,606/- which is set off against brought forward unabsorbed depreciation and therefore, the gross total income is Nil. It was submitted that even after setting off of current year loss, the unabsorbed depreciation is of Rs.31

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. The Gujarat State Co. Op. Housing Finance Corporation Ltd, Ahmedabad

The appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 925/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Pritesh Shah, CA
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

respect of income of co-operative societies. 80P. (1) Where, in the case of an assessee being a co-operative society, the gross total income includes any income referred to in sub- section (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. The Gujarat State Co. Op. Housing Finance Corporation Ltd, Ahmedabad

The appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 924/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Pritesh Shah, CA
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

respect of income of co-operative societies. 80P. (1) Where, in the case of an assessee being a co-operative society, the gross total income includes any income referred to in sub- section (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. The Gujarat State Co. Op. Housing Finance Corporation Ltd, Ahmedabad

The appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 923/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Pritesh Shah, CA
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

respect of income of co-operative societies. 80P. (1) Where, in the case of an assessee being a co-operative society, the gross total income includes any income referred to in sub- section (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section

Muzaffarnagar District Cooperative Bank Ltd., Muzaffarnagar vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the appeals filed by the appellant are allowed and the order(s) of the Kerala High Court and other authorities to the contrary are set aside

ITA 1708/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi05 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 1708/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Muzaffarnagar District Cooperative Vs Dcit, Bank Ltd., C/O Anil Deep & Company, Circle-1, 41/85, Sadar Bazar, Muzaffarnagar, Muzaffarnagar Uttar Pradesh-251001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaam4327P Assessee By : Sh. Sanjay Malik, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2015-16, Arises Against The Order Of Cit(A), Muzaffarnagar Dated 16.01.2018 In Case No. 9258-7434-250-717, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Malik, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 5Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(4)

impugned section 80P deduction as under: 15.1. Section 80P speaks about deduction in respect of income of co- operative societies from the gross total income referred to in sub-section (2) of the said Section. From the said income, there shall be deducted, in accordance with the provisions of Section

Titan Company Limited, Hosur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Ltu 2 (Ic), Chennai

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

ITA 1742/CHNY/2024[2011- 12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1742/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2011-12 Titan Company Limited, Assistant Commissioner Of No.3, Sipcot Industrial Complex, Income Tax, Hosur, Krishnagiri, Ltu-2, Tamil Nadu-635126 Chennai [Pan: Aaact5131A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Abhay Kumar, C.A अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Ms.Komali Krishna, Cit प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.12.2024

For Appellant: Ms.Komali Krishna, CIT
Section 147Section 250Section 80Section 80C(2)(a)Section 80I

units, under the same head are to be aggregated in accordance with provisions of section 70 of the Act to arrive at the Gross Total Income before allowance of any deduction under chapter VIA. 7.6.1 Having gone through the said decision, it is noted that in that case the issue ... profit or loss of the above undertaking, as the case may be, is to be taken into account for the purpose of computing gross total income of the assessee ifi view of sub-Section (I) of sec. 80-IC The appellant is eligible for set off of loss