“carry forward of losses”

Losses & Set-offSection 72Section 72260 judgments

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

Leading authorities on carry forward of losses

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.

CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal

211 ITR 293 · 1995 · High Court

204

citing judgments

A charitable trust can carry forward its excess expenditure from previous years and adjust it against the income of subsequent years, which qualifies as an application of income under Section 11. Additionally, voluntary contributions received for a specific purpose are treated as corpus funds and are not taxable.

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. Matriseva Trust

242 ITR 20 · 2000 · High Court

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. Hariprasad & Company Pvt. Ltd.

99 ITR 118 · 1975 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The terms 'income' or 'profits and gains' are inclusive of losses, signifying that losses are 'minus income' to be factored into the computation of taxable income. Therefore, set-off and carry forward provisions for losses apply exclusively to taxable income or gains and cannot be pressed into service against non-taxable gains, such as those exempt under a DTAA or other specific provisions.

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. DLF Commercial Developers Ltd.

35 Taxmann.com 280 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

Loss incurred by certain types of companies in trading derivatives is considered speculative loss under the Explanation to Section 73, as the value of stock derivatives depends on shares. Such speculative losses are ineligible for set-off or carry forward against business income.

CIT v. Manmohan Das

59 ITR 699 · 1966 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The eligibility for an assessee to carry forward and set off losses, including capital losses, against future income is determined by the Assessing Officer in the year the set-off is claimed, not in the year the loss was incurred.

Judgments citing carry forward of losses

Mithi Software Technologies Private Limited, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 14(3), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2371/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2371/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mithi Software Technologies V The Income Tax Private Limited, S Officer, 101, Mayfair Court, Nachiket Ward-14(3), Pune. Park, Baner Road, Pune – 411045. Pan: Aabcm9352P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue By Shri Ambarnath Khule – Jcit(Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing 24/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Agra Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2014-15 Dated 25.08.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order U/S.143(3) Of

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 41(1)Section 72

income of Rs.NIL and determined the total income at Rs.24,05,570/-. Assessing Officer has not uttered a single word regarding not allowing carry forward of losses, set-off of losses and 10 ITA No.2371/PUN/2025 [A] carried forward of unabsorbed depreciation. This ground was raised before ld.CIT(A). However, ld.CIT ... Also, Schedule-UD of Return of Income gives the unabsorbed depreciation. Once these facts are on record, there was reason for denying the carried forward of losses and unabsorbed depreciation. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the ld.Assessing Officer to allow the carried forward of losses

M/S. Sahajanand Laser Technology Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 16/AHD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 15 & 16/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Ms. Arti N Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, CIT. DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35

erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the disallowance of the claim of Appellant company under the head of carry forward of losses.” We have extensively heard Ms. Arti N Shah, the Ld. AR as well as Shri Praveen Verma

M/S. Sahajanand Laser Technology Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 15/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 15 & 16/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Ms. Arti N Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, CIT. DR

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35

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

takes precedence over conflicting provisions of other laws, including the Income-tax Act, 1961, the grounds of appeal such as the disallowance of carry-forward business losses and the adjustment of refunds against pre-resolution demands—are rendered moot. The approval of the resolution plan extinguishes the appellant ... considered by the authorities below. 4.1. Subsequently, the Ld.AR referring to the decision of NCLT dated 26/10/2020 wherein the Tribunal had rejected the carry forward of loss while approving the resolution plan. It is submitted that against this order, assessee had preferred an appeal before National Company Law Appellate Tribunal

G S Strategic Investments Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT International Tax Circle 2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5644/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 112Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 74

nature and that the Tribunal has ruled in favour of the assessee on the question 5 GS Strategic Investments Limited of adjustment and carry forward of losses; however, observing that the issue has not attained finality, the DRP affirmed the approach of the Assessing Officer to keep the issue alive

ACIT Circle 28(1), New Delhi vs. Subodh Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1951/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshacit, Vs. Subodh Gupta, Circle-28(1), N-50, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakpg5913G

For Appellant: Shri Somil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 153

electronically on 8-1- 2021 under section 139(1) of the Act declaring total income of Rs 5,41,98,020 and claiming carry forward of losses of Rs 1,14,76,791. The return was selected for complete scrutiny on various issues and one such issue flagged

M/S Scania Commercial Vehicles India Pvt Ltfd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore

The Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 261/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 92C

Accordingly, ground no. 19 of the Assessee is allowed. 18. The Ground no. 20 of the Appeal is with respect to the correct carry forward of losses. The Assessee has computed the carry forward of the losses at Rs. 1,62,04,19,109/- whereas the Ld. Assessing Officer ... forward of Rs. 1,61,55,67,479/-. Both the parties confirm that Assessing Officer may be directed to verify and allow correct carry forward of losses. Accordingly, we direct the Ld. Assessing Officer to compute the correct carry forward of losses for any subsequent years to the Assessee.In

The Merchants Co-Op Bank Ltd. ( in Liquidation), Dhule vs. The ITO, Ward- -1, Dhule

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

ITA 1927/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1927/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Merchants Co-Op Bank V The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., (In Liquidation), S. Ward-1, Dhule. Cs No.2111, Lane No.6, Near Old Amnalner Stand, Nagarpatti, Dhule-424001. Pan: Aaabt0123H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke Revenue By Smt Indira R. Adakil-Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 02/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2018-19, Dated 11.03.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order 147 R.W.S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 29.03.2023. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Appellant Contends That The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Ought To Have

Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 21(2)Section 250Section 80P

time for which Assessee has claimed carry 3 ITA No.1927/PUN/2025 [A] forward of losses. Ld.AR further submitted that therefore, Assessee is eligible for carry forward of losses. 4. Ld.AR submitted that ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order and submitted that one more opportunity may be provided

Bharti Telemedia Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 624/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

providers, including the assessee have not claimed nor has the Revenue allowed deduction under section 801A under the Act; and (ii) benefit of carry forward of losses is also not allowed on amalgamation of companies providing DTH business. The Memorandum Explaining provisions of Finance Act, 2002 which sought to provide

DCIT, Circle 4(2), New Delhi vs. M/S Bharti Telemedia Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4966/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

Bharti Telemedia Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4960/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

DCIT, Circle 4(2), New Delhi vs. Ms Bharti Telemedia Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4868/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 35ASection 4

Ankur Dealcom P. Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2204/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2204/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2021-2022) Ankur Dealcom P. Limited, Vs Ito Ward-10(2), Kolkata C/O S.N.Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata-700001 Pan No. :Aahca 2447 F (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 22.07.2025 For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld.Ar That The Impugned Assessment Order Would Not Survive, Insofar As In The Order U/S.263 Of The Act Against The Said Assessment Order, The Coordinate Bench Of The Tribunal Has Categorically Held That The Notice U/S.143(2) Of The Act, Dated 20.06.2022 Which Is Culminated In The Assessment Order Dated 23.12.2022, Which Is An Impugned Assessment Order Would Not Survive, Insofar As Notice U/S.143(2) Of The Act Was Not In Conformity With The Cbdt Instruction F.No.225/157/2017/Ita-Ii Dated 23-06-2017. It Was The Submission That As Against The Order U/S.263 Of The Act The Coordinate Bench Of The Tribunal

For Respondent: None

Section 12ESection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in deleting the disallowance of carry forward of losses of earlier years? (b) whether the Learned Tribunal has substantially erred in law in holding that the Assessing Officer exceeded his jurisdiction

Cambridge Construction (Delhi) Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 4939/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandracambridge Construction Vs. Ito, Ward 5(3) (Delhi) Private Limited New Delhi – 110002 11, Monnet House, Masjid Moth, New Delhi – 110048 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacc0295N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. VK Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 154Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

order. The extracts of Para 7, 8 & 9 are as under:- “7. The principles with respect to set off and carry forward of losses as enunciated therein would in fact support the contention of the assessee. In our considered opinion, while it was incumbent upon the assessee to have established

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

passed after verification of relevant details and documentary evidence and application of mind vis-à-vis issues pertaining to depreciation on goodwill and carry forward of losses; 3. failed to appreciate that the NeAC had taken a plausible view supported by judicial precedents and prospective amendment in Section ... amount of Rs.7,55,90,173 pertains to depreciation on Voot platform (which is an intangible asset) and not goodwill. Short-grant of carry forward of losses 7. erred in determining the amount of carried forward losses at Rs.6,86,23,58,774 instead of Rs.10

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

original return and consequently, all other provisions 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, he ought to have allowed the carry forward capital loss claimed by the assessee. 6. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee, held that, as per the provisions ... there is no merit in the contention of the assessee because of restrictive provisions contained in Section 80 of the Act, which prohibits carry forward of losses to the subsequent year, once the return of income has not been filed on or before the due date provided under Section

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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Lurgi India International Services Private Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed as above

ITA 5826/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: allowing carry forward of losses.”

Section 142(1)Section 37Section 79

Delhi High Court in the case of M/s Yum Restaurants (India) Private Limited vs ITO in ITA no. 349 of 2015 before allowing carry forward of losses.” 2.1 Vide above grounds, the Revenue has raised two issues: i. Disallowance of Foreign Exchange fluctuation loss of Rs.2 ... Disallowance of carry forward of losses under section 79 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) 3. The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee, engaged in the business of engineering consultant, Research Engineers Press Engineers Planning and Consultant Engineers etc., filed its Income

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)

fixed by the CBDT vide Circular No.9/2024 dated 17.09.2024. Assessee also contended in the cross objection that CIT(A) has rightly allowed carry forward of losses. 2. Heard rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below. On perusal of the assessment order, we noticed that the AO while completing ... case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT and allowed carry forward of current year losses. 3. We noticed that the carry forward of losses were denied by the AO on the ground that there is a change in the share holding pursuant to the order of the NCLT, Delhi

Seva Bharathi, Hyderabad vs. CIT., Exemption Ward 1(4), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA.No.1307/Hyd

ITA 365/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.365 & 1307/Hyd/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2022-2023 Seva Bharathi, The Commissioner Of Hyderabad – 500 018. Income Tax Vs. Telangana. (Exemptions), Ward-1(4), Pan Aayts5233K Hyderabad – 500 004. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Sri Harsha राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

For Appellant: CA Sri HarshaFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

taxmann.com 223/288 Tasman 491/446 ITR 1. The assessee furnished original return taking the benefit of section 108 and did not carry forward the loss. Thereafter, a revised return was filed foregoing the claim of deduction u/s 10B. The AO rejected the withdrawal of exemption under section 10B by holding that ... under section 139(5) of the Act, assessee did not claim deduction under section 10B of the Act, and instead claimed benefit of carry forward of losses. It was in light of these facts that the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that on a plain reading of section