“unabsorbed depreciation”

DepreciationSection 32(2)Section 32(2)810 judgments

The decision most relied on for unabsorbed depreciation is Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (340 ITR 477), cited in 213 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on unabsorbed depreciation

Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

340 ITR 477 · 2012 · High Court

213

citing judgments

If unabsorbed depreciation or losses from years prior to the initial assessment year for Section 80-IA claim have already been set off against other income, they cannot be notionally carried forward again to reduce the profits of the eligible unit for computing deduction under Section 80-IA. The notional carry forward provision under Section 80-IA(5) applies only to unabsorbed depreciation or losses that have not yet been absorbed.

General Motors India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

354 ITR 244 · 2013 · High Court

141

citing judgments

Unabsorbed depreciation from Assessment Year 1997-98 to 2001-02, carried forward to AY 2002-03, is governed by Section 32(2) as amended by the Finance Act, 2001, allowing its unlimited carry forward and set off against income of subsequent years. Reassessment proceedings under Section 148 challenging such set-off require valid reasons and new tangible material.

CIT v. Rittal India (P) Limited

380 ITR 423 · 2016 · High Court

121

citing judgments

Additional depreciation is allowable under section 32(1)(iia) for new machinery or plant even when put to use for less than 180 days, with the unabsorbed balance available for claim in the subsequent year.

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. Black & Veatch Consulting Pvt. Ltd.

348 ITR 72 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

Depreciation, including unabsorbed depreciation, should not be reduced from the profits of an undertaking eligible for deduction under Section 10A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, when computing the deduction amount.

Dy. CIT v. Binani Industries Ltd.

178 TTJ 658 · 2016 · ITAT

citing judgments

The lower of unabsorbed depreciation or business loss is deductible from book profits under Clause (iii) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB. Capital receipts, such as forfeiture of share warrants, which do not have the character of income, are not liable for book profits tax under Section 115JB.

S.M.I.L.E. Microfinance Limited v. ACIT (VACIT

2024 SCC OnLine MAD 8416 · 2024 · Reported

citing judgments

The higher tax rate under Section 115BBE, increased to 60% effective from April 1, 2017, is not applicable to transactions that occurred prior to this date.

62. Further, in CIT v. Silical Metallurgic Ltd.

324 ITR 29 · 2010 · High Court

citing judgments

In a scenario involving amalgamation, the accumulated losses and unabsorbed depreciation of an undertaking can be carried forward by the amalgamating company if it continues the business of the undertaking.

Judgments citing unabsorbed depreciation

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT Ltu (2), Mumbai

ITA 424/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Section 115JSection 211

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SPECIAL BENCH’ MUMBAI BEFORE: JUSTICE (Retd.) SHRI C.V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT

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

ITA 3740/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Section 115JSection 211

ITA No.424/Mum/2020 & 3740/Mum/2018 The Union Bank of India & Central Bank of India आदेश / O R DER PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Ascend Telecom Infrastructure Private Limited, Secunderabad

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 552/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.552/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Ascend Telecom Income Tax, Central Circle Infrastructure (P) Ltd 3(2), Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.539/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ascend Telecom Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Infrastructure (P) Ltd Income Tax, Central Secunderabad Circle 3(2), Hyderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.R. Vasudevan राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 05/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Are Cross Appeals Filed By Both The Assessee As Well As The Revenue For The A.Y 2010-11 Against The Common Order Dated 31/07/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A) 11 Hyderabad.

For Appellant: Shri K.R. VasudevanFor Respondent: : Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

learned AR submitted that the appellant has filed all the details with respect to brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation of the amalgamating company. However, the learned CIT (A) has allowed losses relating to amalgamated company, but not allowed losses of amalgamating company. Therefore, he submitted that the matter ... Officer. 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. We find that the brought forward business losses and unabsorbed depreciation of the amalgamating company should be allowed in terms of section 72A r.w.s. 79 of the I.T. Act, 1961, provided all other conditions prescribed

Ascend Telecom Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 539/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K.R. VasudevanFor Respondent: : Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

M/S. Sabarmati Gas Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. The Pr. CIT-3, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 368/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2018-19 Sabarmati Gas Ltd. The Ld.Pr.Cit Plot No.907, Sector 21 Vs Ahmedabad-3. Gandhinagar 382 021 Pan : Aakcs 0110 N

For Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40

Even otherwise, we are aware, that even if the assessee had returned losses in any preceding year, the assessee was entitled to claim the unabsorbed depreciation of that year as the depreciation of the succeeding year in terms of section 32(2) of the Act. Section

M/S. Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Limited., Kolkata vs. NFAC, Delhi.

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

ITA 843/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.843/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Humara India Credit Co-Operative ………. Appellant Society Ltd. (Pan: Aaaah8186M) Vs. Assessing Officer, ………… Respondent National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi Appearances By: Shri Shri Praveen Kumar Bansal, Ar Appeared For Appellant. Shri Nicholash Murmu, Addl. Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 22.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 04.09.2024 Order Per Dr. Manish Borad:

Section 143(3)Section 250

claimed by the appellant in the revised computation of income and confirming his order of carried forward of unabsorbed depreciation only to the extent of Rs.23, 05,247/-. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in holding that the computation sheet issued along with the assessment order showing ... that the Ld. AO has mentioned a wrong amount of carried forward loss in the computation sheet and has inadvertently mentioned the figure of unabsorbed depreciation in place of the business loss. Brief synopsis filed by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee reads as under: “The only issue involved

Shri Vitthal Sahakari Sakhar K Ltd.., Solapur vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Solapur

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

ITA 580/PUN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.580/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 Shri Vitthal Vs Dcit, Sahakarisakharkarakhana Circle-1, Solapur. Limited, At Gursale Post Gursale, Tal Pandarpur District, Solapur – 413304. Pan: Aaaas3892H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hanmant D Dhavle – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 02/09/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 17.03.2023 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : Shri Vitthal Sahakari Sakhar Ltd., [A]

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250

order dated 13.06.2019 had remitted back the issue of concessional sugar price, concessional sale of Bio Composite, carry forward of business loss and unabsorbed depreciation to the Assessing Officer(AO) with certain specific directions. 4.1 Regarding the sale of sugar at concessional rate, the ITAT in appeal no.591/PUN/2014 had given ... Business Loss/Depreciation : 8. Assessee has not produced copies of earlier returns and earlier assessment orders to demonstrate Brought Forward Business Loss and Brought Forward Unabsorbed Depreciation. Therefore, this issue is set-aside to the AO for de-novo adjudication. Assessee shall produce all the necessary details before the Assessing Officer

International Seaport Dredging Private Limited, Chennai vs. PCIT - 1, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1597/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baram Som, IRS, CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 71Section 79

held as under:- "The High Court has answered the question saying that when section 79 speaks of loss, it does not include unabsorbed depreciation or unabsorbed development rebate. We agree with the High Court." In view of the above decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri ... Subhulaxmi Mills Ltd, (supra) the assessee has claimed that the position is thus settled that the carry forward and set off of unabsorbed depreciation is not governed by section 79 of the Act. However, ld.CIT directed the ld.AO to verify if the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Mumbai

ITA 1533/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved &For Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263

appreciating that as there has been no prejudice to the revenue, the said issue is outside the purview of section 263. 35. Disallowance of unabsorbed depreciation 35.1 The learned PCIT erred setting aside the same without providing any reason or justification for the same. 35.2 The learned PCIT erred ... appreciating that the assessee had not claimed any deduction in respect of unabsorbed depreciation in the MAT computation. 35.3 The learned PCIT erred in not appreciating that as there has been no prejudice to the revenue, the said issue is outside the purview of section 263." 03. Brief facts

Aet Laboratories Private Limited, Medak vs. DCIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 963/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.963/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Aet Laboratories (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Medak Circle 8(1) Pan:Aadcm6591L Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A Srinivas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 26/08/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR

Section 10B

which the computation of income is under Chapter VI of the Act and thus, before allowing set off of forward business loss or unabsorbed depreciation, exemption should be allowed. Page 5 of 11 ITA No 963 of 2017 AET Laboratories P Ltd Medak 8. The learned DR, on the other ... rightly upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer and their order should be upheld. In so far as set off of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation, although the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd (Supra

M/S. Mundra International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd., Kutch vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1916/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

from A.Y. 2003-04. However assessee has not claimed the deduction in the initial year due to negative gross total income on account of unabsorbed depreciation. However for the present A.Y. 2015-16 since there was positive income the assessee claimed the deduction and drawn to the Form

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Mundra International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

ITA 1872/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Mundra International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

ITA 1711/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

Mundra International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd., Kutch vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1613/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

Todi Industries Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - 8(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 895/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 22Section 37

Book Profits u/s. 115JB of the Act. (VIII) Non Grant of MAT Credit amounting to Rs. 13,42,936/-. (IX) Non Grant of Unabsorbed Depreciation amounting to Rs. 8,81,186/-. (X)Non Grant of Brought Forward and Carry forward of MAT Credit amounting

Kumar Medicare Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Department, Mumbai

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

ITA 1675/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyalkumar Medicare Pvt. Ltd., 001 Gr. Floor, Shivashirwad Building, Ganesh Mandir Road, Dombivali East, Thane Maharashtra 421 201 Pan: Aacck4186G ..... Appellant Vs. Cit/Nfac Delhi ..... Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule, Ld. DR

Section 10Section 115BSection 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

depreciation is attributable to any of the deductions referred to in clause (i); (iii) without set off of any loss or allowance for unabsorbed depreciation deemed so under section 72A, if such loss or depreciation is attributable to any of the deductions referred to in clause

Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT, Circle-18(2), Noida

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Applications of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4420/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Ms. Pallavi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Adv.( Special Counsel for Revenue) & Sh. Karnav Mahrotra,

Section 234BSection 234CSection 251Section 32Section 43BSection 80

business or profession’. (G. No. 18 of the AM) 8. That the Ld. AO has erred in not allowing the correct set off of unabsorbed depreciation from earlier years. (G. No. 20 of the AM) 9. That the levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act is erroneous and deserves ... Ground No. 15 and 16 of the AM) 7. That the Appellant be allowed to carry forward the unabsorbed depreciation of the earlier years (Ground No. 17 of the AM) 8. That the levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act is erroneous and deserves to be deleted. (Ground

Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT, Circle-18(2), Noida

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Applications of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4419/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Ms. Pallavi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Adv.( Special Counsel for Revenue) & Sh. Karnav Mahrotra,

Section 234BSection 234CSection 251Section 32Section 43BSection 80

Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT, Circle-18(2), Noida

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Applications of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4418/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Ms. Pallavi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Adv.( Special Counsel for Revenue) & Sh. Karnav Mahrotra,

Section 234BSection 234CSection 251Section 32Section 43BSection 80

M/S Man Diesel & Turbo India Ltd., Maharashtra vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is hereby dismissed

ITA 4295/DEL/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singha.Y. 2003-04

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

account of provisions of unaccounted expenses, at a total income of Rs. 2,80,91,882/-. After setting off carried forward losses/ unabsorbed depreciation, total income was assessed at Nil. Aggrieved against it assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals) who vide impugned order dated 18.03.2015 dismissed the appeal