“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

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

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

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

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

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

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Hsbc Electronic Data Processing India Private Limited, Hyderabad

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

ITA 1632/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 115Section 115JSection 251(1)(a)Section 37(1)Section 41(1)

under: "35. The Scheme of Deductions under Chapter VI-A in Sections 80-HH. 80-HHC. 80-IB, etc from the 'Gross Total Income of the Undertaking', which may arise from different specified activities in these provisions and other incomes may exclude interest income from the ambit of Deductions under ... under Section 10-A or 10-B of the Act, rather than it being a special character of income entitled to Deduction from Gross Total Income under Chapter VI- A under Section 80-HH, etc. The words 'derived by an Undertaking' in Section 10-A or 10-B are different

Sri. Aravindan Vedhavaththiyar Singarachari, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(3)(1), Bangalore

ITA 666/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anjala Sahu, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(1)Section 50C

information, independent enquiries have been made and it is seen that the assessee has furnished ITR forA.Y. 2016-17 on 04/08/2016 declaring gross total income at Rs. 32.60,471/- and total income of Rs. 31,10,470/- after claiming deduction of Rs. 1.50,000/- under Chapter- VIA of the Income

Sri. Aravindan Vedhavaththiyar Singarachari, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(3)(1), Bangalore

ITA 665/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

Section 143(1)Section 50C

information, independent enquiries have been made and it is seen that the assessee has furnished ITR forA.Y. 2016-17 on 04/08/2016 declaring gross total income at Rs. 32.60,471/ and total income of Rs. 31,10,470/- after claiming deduction of Rs. 1.50,000/- under Chapter- VIA of the Income

Inter Gold (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. PCIT-2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4400/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80G

deduction u/s.80G on a donation should be voluntary. It is independent of computation of business income as it is allowed from Gross Total Income. The assessee had disallowed the CSR expenses while computing business income. Further, there is no dispute that the assessee has filed complete details of donation ... Section, such sum paid by the assessee in the previous year as a donation. Deduction under Chapter VIA provides deduction from the gross total income which is computed after making necessary allowances / disallowances in accordance with Section 28-44BB of the Act including Explanation to Section 37(1). Thus

M/S. Torino Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward, 41(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2470/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Shah, AR

Section 143(1)Section 2(19)Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(d)

referred to in sub-section (2) to section 80P M/s Torino Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. of the Act is included in the gross total income of the assessee, the same shall be allowed as a deduction. It is pertinent to note that since the assessee is registered under

Sri. Ganesh Vasudeva Shet, Shivamogga vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps, Shivamogga

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

ITA 1105/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT-DR

Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 234

wherein Rs. 81,45,189/- claimed as agriculture income in the return was added as unexplained income from undisclosed sources. The gross total income computed by the Ld.AO is as under: Gross Total Income as per ITR filed Rs. 13,02,589 Addition of agriculture income as mentioned above ... Assessed income Gross Total Income Rs. 94,47,780 2.2 It is submitted that assessee is aged about 84 years and is suffering from health issues, known as D M type 2 disorder, Hypertension and heart disease. It is submitted that, the assessee sought an adjournment

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Office Pandharpur vs. Dhanshree Mahila Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd, Mangalwedha

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 853/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel

Section 250Section 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

Sangram Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit, Ahmednagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2, Ahmednagar

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 261/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Om Infra Limited, Jaipur Rajasthan vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur, Rajasthan

In the result, we find no substantial question of law being involved in this appeal

ITA 811/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 80Section 801C(2)(b)Section 80I

ITAT Amritsar Bench ITA Nos. 61 & 62/Asr/2004 Para 5/6 (Para 4- 6.4 & Para 5 ) Such view is inconformity with the definition of gross total income as defined in s. 80B(5) of the IT Act. The judgment of Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kotagiri Industrial Co-operative ... this issue and supports this view. In this case, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in order to arrive at the "gross total income" defined under s.80B(5), brought forward business losses of the earlier years are required to be set off under s.72 of the Act, before allowing

Karnataka Bank Ltd, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangaluru

ITA 562/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 115TSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(vii)

ITA Nos.555 & 562/Bang/2024 The Karnataka Bank Limited, Mangalore Page 1 of 20 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Mangalore vs. The Karnataka Bank Limited, Mangalore

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

ITA 555/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Sri S. Ananthan & Smt. Lalitha RameswaranFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 115TSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(vii)

deduction for provision for bad and doubtful debts for certain banks (not incorporated outside India) and certain cooperative banks to 7.5% of gross total income (before deduction under this clause) of such banks and 10% of the aggregate average advance made by the rural branches of such banks. This limit ... gross total income (before deduction under this clause) under sections 36(1)(viia)(b) and 36(1)(viia)(c) for a bank incorporated outside India and certain financial institutions. Provisions of clause (vii) of section 36(1) of the Act provides for deduction for bad debt actually written

Dinesh Kumar Singhi, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 481/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Years : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R Pradeep & Ms. Girija G.PFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)

Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 234ASection 68Section 69C

justice be rendered.” 3. The assessee is an individual field his return of income(ROI) for the impugned assessment year on 30/03/2016 declaring gross total income of Rs.2,44,77,947/-. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices

Sohamnagar Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. Vibhag II, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(6), Ahmedabad

In the result appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 177/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad , Which Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 17-01-2023 In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1048850676(1)

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 250Section 37Section 56Section 57

maintenance charges , against rental and interest income is further fortified in the manner computation of income is made in the 1961 Act , wherein gross total income under the five heads of income are aggregated in the case of the tax-payers , and thereafter deductions under Chapter VI-A are allowed

Aiho Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., Malda vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Malda

ITA 129/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.129/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Aiho Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd..……………....………....Appellant Jadab Nagar, Aiho Maldah – 732121. [Pan: Aabaa0284A] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Malda….….................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 28, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 30 , 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee-Society Against The Order Dated 29.11.2023 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. The Assessee-Society In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Action Of The A.O (Cpc) In Not Granting The Benefit Of Deduction U/S 80(P) To The Tune Of Rs.35,83,555/- In Respect Of Income Earned From Deposits With Bank From Non-Agricultural Purposes. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Action Of The A.O (Cpc) To Disallowance Of The Cash Deposit During The Demonetization Period Amounting To Rs.1,86,30,500/- & Wrongly Added Total Rs.2,22,14,055 As Taxable Income.

Section 250Section 5Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

Aiho Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd "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, the sums

L and T Group of Companies Employees Co-Op Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Ward 24(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2531/MUM/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri. Narendra Kumar Billaiya**

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 80P(2)(d)

interest income accrued from investment with other cooperative society including co-operative bank which is included in part of the gross total income.* - *3. Not Considering the various ITAT and court Judgments clearly allowing the deductions claimed under 80P(2)(d) of Income Tax Act 1961 to a Cooperative society ... assessee has filed the income tax return for A.Y. 2013-14 u/s. 139(1) of the Act on 03.12.2018 declaring gross total income of Rs. 18,64,642/-. The assessee during the relevant year under consideration has claimed deduction

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ichalkaranji vs. Appasaheb Naik (Dada) Shri Paisa Fund Shetaki Sah. Bank Ltd., Hupari

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 586/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep P. Sathe

Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)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

The Andhra Pradesh State Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the S.As. filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 464/HYD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Ms. K. Haritha, CIT-DR

Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37

allowed at all. As far as Asst. year 2008-09 is concerned the Assessing Officer allowed the provision of 7.5% of the gross total income only. APCOB, despite the fact that the provision for 2007-08 was in dispute had reduced this amount as well the provision