← All Phrases

“set off of losses”

Losses & Set-offSections 70-80Sections 70-80275 judgments

The decision most relied on for set off of losses is CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. (391 ITR 274), cited in 290 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on set off of losses

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.

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.

Income Tax v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS)
131 Taxmann 386 · 2003 · High Court
188
citing judgments

The Income Tax Act, 1961, does not permit the carry forward of excess expenditure of a charitable trust to be set off against future surpluses, as such trusts are governed by a self-contained code under Sections 11 to 13, not the head 'Profits and Gains of Business'. However, depreciation on fixed assets is allowable to a charitable institution registered under section 12A.

CIT v. J.H. Gotla
156 ITR 323 · 1985 · Supreme Court
176
citing judgments

The Supreme Court holds that for income tax purposes, the term 'income' includes 'loss,' allowing for the set-off of a spouse's or minor child's business losses when their income is clubbed with the assessee. This decision emphasizes interpreting tax statutes, especially benevolent provisions, by considering the legislative scheme over a strict literal construction.

Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT
247 ITR 290 · 2001 · High Court
136
citing judgments

Income deemed under sections 68, 69, 69A, 69B, or 69C of the Income-tax Act is a distinct category, separate from regular heads of income under Section 14, and losses from other heads, including business losses, cannot be set off against such deemed income.

CIT v. Matriseva Trust
242 ITR 20 · 2000 · High Court
91
citing judgments

An excess of expenditure incurred by a charitable trust in previous years can be adjusted against the income of a subsequent year, and this adjustment is considered an application of income for charitable purposes under Section 11.

CIT v. Ace Builders (P) Ltd.
281 ITR 210 · 2005 · High Court
88
citing judgments

The deeming fiction in Section 50, which treats capital gains from depreciable assets as short-term, applies only for the purpose of computing capital gains under that section. For other provisions, such as set-off of losses under Section 74 or deductions under Section 54E/54EC, the asset's original character (long-term or short-term) is to be considered.

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.

Judgments citing set off of losses

Rohit Kumar, Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. the United Provinces Sugar Company Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 1130/KOL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2024-25 Ito, Ward-12(1), Kolkata…..……..……….………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. M/S The United Provinces Sugar Company Pvt. Ltd.…….....……...…..…..Respondent 1St Floor, Chartered Bank Building, 4, Netaji Subhash Road, Kol-1. [Pan: Aaact4947L] Appearances By: Shri S B Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri J P Khaitan, Sr. Counsel, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 03, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.03.2025 Of The Addl/Jcit(A)-9, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2024–25. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 11.10.2024 Claiming A Refund Of Rs.15,61,200/- Pursuant To Set-Off Of Brought Forward Business Loss Against The Returned Income. Intimation Order U/S. 143(1) Of The Act Was Directly Passed On 01.11.2024, Assessing A Refund Of Rs.16,22,410/- & Allowing Setoff Of Brought Forward Loss Against Income As Done In The Return Of Income. However, The Order Did Not Capture The Schedule Of Carry Forward Business Loss & Unabsorbed Depreciation For Earlier Years. M/S The United Provinces Sugar Company Pvt. Ltd 3. Aggrieved By The Above Order, The Assessee Filed Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee By Observing As Under:

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

disallowing the carry forward of business loss and unabsorbed depreciation. The ld. AR further submits that the disallowance is not justified when the set off of losses has been allowed in the impugned intimation order and the brought forward losses have been accepted by the Assessing Officer in earlier assessment

Income-Tax Officer Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Furnish Home, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the asessee is allowed, whereas, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1671/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), wherein detailed submissions supported by the books of accounts, statutory returns, confirmation and other documentary evidences were filed. A remand report of the AO was sought on the same by the Ld. CIT(A) after considering which, Ld. CIT(A) deleted

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumbhare, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 68Section 69

tune of Rs.6,96,360/- as opposed to Rs.26,96,360/- added by the AO on this account. The assessee also claimed set off of losses of Rs.2,00,985/- returned by it which, the Ld. CIT(A) held the same to be allowable for the purpose of determining ... before final appeal.” 5. While the Revenue has challenged the deletion of addition made by the AO as well as the allowance of set off of losses for computing the income of the assessee for the impugned year by the Ld. CIT(A), raising the following grounds in its appeal

Furnish Home, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(1) Old Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the asessee is allowed, whereas, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1439/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumbhare, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 68Section 69

tune of Rs.6,96,360/- as opposed to Rs.26,96,360/- added by the AO on this account. The assessee also claimed set off of losses of Rs.2,00,985/- returned by it which, the Ld. CIT(A) held the same to be allowable for the purpose of determining ... before final appeal.” 5. While the Revenue has challenged the deletion of addition made by the AO as well as the allowance of set off of losses for computing the income of the assessee for the impugned year by the Ld. CIT(A), raising the following grounds in its appeal

Ashvin Dineshbhai Jadav, Rajkot vs. ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 428/RJT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

assessing officer while passing the assessment order treated the income of Rs. 41,64,500/- as undisclosed income however did not allow the set off of losses incurred of Rs. 34,80,931/- in share transactions. Hence, addition made by the assessing officer may be deleted and set ... assessing officer while passing the assessment order treated the income of Rs. 41,64,500/- as undisclosed income however did not allow the set off of losses incurred of Rs. 34,80,931/- in share transactions. It is also submitted by the assessee that the details of loss incurred

Ishares Core Msci Total International Stock Etf (As A Successor to Ishare Core Taotal International Stock Mauritius Company ), Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (Int. Tax)-2(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6774/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor To Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company) C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aafci3337N V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Tax) - 2(2)(2) Room No.606, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, ……………… Respondent C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 Ishares Msci All Country Asia Ex Japan Etf C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aabti7439L ............... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Pranav GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 70Section 70(2)

assessee submitted that ITAs No.6050, 6051 & 6774/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2022-23 & 2023-24) 7 section 70 of the Act allows the assessee to set off the losses of lower taxable gains with the gains of higher taxable gains. In support of its submission, the assessee placed reliance upon several judicial pronouncements ... set-off and carry forward of gains of having differential tax rates. Accordingly, the short-term capital gain was computed by first setting off 15% loss against 15% gains, as follows: – Particulars Amount (INR) Amount (INR) (Taxable @ 15%) (Taxable @ 30%) Short-term capital gains

Ishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor to Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Tp) 2(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6051/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor To Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company) C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aafci3337N V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Tax) - 2(2)(2) Room No.606, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, ……………… Respondent C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 Ishares Msci All Country Asia Ex Japan Etf C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aabti7439L ............... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Pranav GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 70Section 70(2)

assessee submitted that ITAs No.6050, 6051 & 6774/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2022-23 & 2023-24) 7 section 70 of the Act allows the assessee to set off the losses of lower taxable gains with the gains of higher taxable gains. In support of its submission, the assessee placed reliance upon several judicial pronouncements ... set-off and carry forward of gains of having differential tax rates. Accordingly, the short-term capital gain was computed by first setting off 15% loss against 15% gains, as follows: – Particulars Amount (INR) Amount (INR) (Taxable @ 15%) (Taxable @ 30%) Short-term capital gains

Ishares Msci All Country Asia Ex Japan Etf, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Int. Tax)-2(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 6050/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pranav GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 70Section 70(2)

set- off and carry-forward of losses. In response, the assessee submitted that section 70 of the Act allows the assessee to set off the losses of lower taxable gains with the gains of higher taxable gains. In support of its submission, the assessee placed reliance upon several judicial pronouncements ... set-off and carry forward of gains of having differential tax rates. Accordingly, the short-term capital gain was computed by first setting off 15% loss against 15% gains, as follows: Particulars Amount (INR) Amount (INR) (Taxable @ 15%) | (Taxable @ 30%) Short-term capital gains

Jsw Steel Coated Products Ltd (Successor of M/S. Asian Colour Coated Ispat Ltd), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 5(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3407/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar ()

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 31

therefore carrying forward of losses is not permitted.” 8. Section 79 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which deals with carry forward and set off of losses in case of certain companies is to the following effect: “79. Carry forward and set off of losses in case of certain companies

ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1549/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate and Shri C. Naresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT DR
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 90

those tax credits in the year in which the assessee is actually subjected to a higher tax burden on account of reduced eligible set off of losses carried forward. In this respect, relevant paragraphs from the order of the Coordinate Bench (supra) are extracted below for ready reference ... taxed abroad, and reduced from the losses carried forward) are Rs 100 crores, and the assessee has a total taxable income (before setting off the losses carried forward) of Rs 150 crores in the next year, the assessee will have only Rs 100 crores set off against that year

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

ITA 1397/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 90

those tax credits in the year in which the assessee is actually subjected to a higher tax burden on account of reduced eligible set off of losses carried forward. In this respect, relevant paragraphs from the order of the Coordinate Bench (supra) are extracted below for ready reference ... taxed abroad, and reduced from the losses carried forward) are Rs 100 crores, and the assessee has a total taxable income (before setting off the losses carried forward) of Rs 150 crores in the next year, the assessee will have only Rs 100 crores set off against that year

Viacom 18, Media Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. PCIT-8, Mumbai

ITA 2591/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Agarwal/Ms. MokshaFor Respondent: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 32

computation of total income Part-B, it is losses carried forward is Rs.53,86,79,186/- and no set off of losses during the year. 5. As per ITR Schedule-CFL (ITR-2019-20) you have shown carried forward losses of Rs.3,27,30,79,767/- whereas you have shown ... amounting to R.s 3,03,62,15,139/- (refer the break up below) were set off against losses of A.Y. 2009-10, 2012- 13 and 2013- 14: Assessment year Profits/ (loss) for the year 2010-11 10,49,98.521/- 2011-12 92.51,51.908/- 2015-16 200,60.64,710/- Total profits

Madhvi Ajitkumar Ranka, Na vs. Arivs.ACIT, Navsari Circle, Navsari

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 124/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.124/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Madhvi Ajitkumar Ranka, Vs. Acit, 88, Sunder Nagar, Jamalpore, Navsari Circle, Navsari – 396445 Navsari "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahfpr5791K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Darshit J. Naik, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

Section 250Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 68

assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). CIT(A) confirmed all the additions made by the AO in the assessment order. He, however, allowed set off of losses in her case for AY 2016-17, in view of CBDT Circular No. 11/2019 dated 19.06.2019. 11. Aggrieved by the order

Mukut Behari Lal Bhargava, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle(2)1, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2012/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalmukut Behari Lal Bhargava, Acit, Lcg 05, 04B Laburnum Complex, Circle-2(1), 1 4Th Floor, Sushant Lok 1, Vs. Gurgaon. Block-A, Sector-28 Haryana-122009. Pan-Adipb9356P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Shri Pradumna Kumar Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A) In Short] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Gurugaon-1/10738/2018-19 Dated 05.02.2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, In Short) For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,20,41,040/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny & During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Has Issued Various Notices Which Were Replied By The Assessee. Mukut Behari Lal Bhargava Vs. Acit 3. Thereafter, The Assessment Order Was Passed At A Total Income Of Rs.1,79,36,182/- By Making Disallowance On Account Of Expenses Claimed On Costs Of Improvement Of Capital Asset, Disallowance Of Carry Forward Of Short Term Capital Gains & Long Term Capital Loss & Also Denied The Deduction Claimed U/S 80G Of The Act.

Section 250Section 271Section 80G

Behari Lal Bhargava vs. ACIT forward from Assessment Year 2009-10 and 2014-15. Section 70 of the Act prohibits the allowability of set off of losses where the return of filed for the relevant assessment year in which such losses is incurred, is filed beyond the due date prescribed

John George, Ernakulam vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi

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

ITA 766/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2018-19 John George, .......... Appellant Apt No.11A Infra Foreshore, Ifp Road, Fine Arts Avenue, Ernakulam, Kerala- 682 016. Vs. [Pan: Adlpg1701A]

For Appellant: Mr.Gopalakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 147

hereinafter “the Act”) dated 22.08.2023 making variation in respect of Long term Capital Gain and variation in respect of issue of set off of losses disallowed. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal

Discovery Digital Network Private Limited, Nashik vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Nashik

ITA 2886/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Nimesh VoraFor Respondent: Shri Vidya Ratan Kishore
Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 23Section 234DSection 244A

claiming deduction under section 10AA, 10B, 10BA and any deduction under heading "C" of Chapter VIA, (2) Section 80 for carry forward and set off of losses u/s 72 to 74A. Therefore, it is submitted that whenever the legislature intended to enforce an embargo on the assessee to make claims

Sh. Anil Sharma, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-30(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1402/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2023-24] Ira Sharma, Vs Dcit L/H Of Late Shri Anil Cpc, Bangalore Sharma (Since Deceased), Ito, Ward-30(1) Civic Centre, New Delhi W-68, Greater Kailash Part-I, New Delhi-110048. Pan-Aasps8245F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Vipin Jain, Ar Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.11.2025

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 70

same computation i.e. tax rates applicable on both the gains and losses are different and therefore, Ld. CIT(A) has not allowed the set off of losses against the LTCG declared by the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before ... segregate STCG and LTCG on the basis of the tax rate charged on different types of gains. He, therefore, requested for the set off of losses as claimed be allowed. 6. Ld. AR further placed reliance on the judgement of Co-ordinate Bench of Bangalore Tribunal in the case

Income Tax Officer Ward 29(1), New Delhi vs. Sahil Jain, New Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1452/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Sh. Sahil Jain, Income Tax Officer, Ward-29(1), 117, Engineering Enclave, New Delhi Pitampura, New Delhi Pan: Afspj1105L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 80J

assessee. Having held so, the same was assessable under the head 'business and profession' and as stated above, the benefit of set off of losses both current and brought forward was allowable to the assessee in accordance with law. 2. The contention of the Revenue therefore that the income ... treated as deemed income u/s. 69,69A/B/C of the Act is accordingly rejected and as a consequence thereto the plea that no set off of losses be allowed against the same u/s. 115BBE of the Act also is rejected. 3. Therefore, as per the facts of the case

DCIT, Circle 4(2), New Delhi vs. Bansal Steels Power Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross

ITA 4891/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4891/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2018-19 बनाम Dcit, Bansal Steels Power Ltd. Circle 4(1), Vs. 35, Jhandewalan, Motia Khan, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacg1010F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Co No.230/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4891/Del/2024) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Bansal Steels Power Ltd. Dcit, 35, Jhandewalan, Motia Khan, Vs. Circle 4(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacg1010F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 2Section 79Section 79(2)(c)

denied invoking the provision of Section 79 of the Act. Section 79 of the Act reads as under: “79. Carry forward and set off of losses in the case of certain companies Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, where a change in shareholding has taken place in a previous year

Reliance Power Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground of appeal raised by assessee is allowed

ITA 1348/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Omkareshwar Chidara(Physical Hearing) Dcit – 15(3)(1), Mumbai Reliance Power Limited Room No. 460, 4Th Floor, H-Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Vs Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Knowledge City, Koperkhairane, Mumbai – 400020] Navi Mumbai-400710 [Pan: Aaacr2365L] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Reliance Power Limited Dcit – 15(3)(1), Mumbai Room No. 460, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Reliance Centre, Ground Floor, 19 Vs Walchand Hirachand Marg, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai – 400020] [Pan: Aaacr2365L] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 50

However, the AO disregarded such submission and treated the gain on sale of helicopter as short term capital gain for all purposes including set off of losses. Accordingly, the set off against the long term capital loss was not allowed. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that long term

Shri Vishwakarama Jewellers, Akola vs. DCIT Akola Circle, Akola

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 99/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri S.G. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 69B

Assessee. Having held so, the same was assessable under the head 'business and profession' and as stated above, the benefit of set off of losses both current and brought forward was allowable to the Assessee in accordance with law. 21. The contention of the Revenue therefore that the income ... treated as deemed income u/s 69,69A/B/C of the Act is accordingly rejected and as a con-sequence thereto the plea that no set off of losses be allowed against the same u/s 115BBE of the Act also is rejected. 22. Therefore, as per the facts of the case