THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S EXIDE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

disallowance made in respect of claim of losses from pension fund not allowed to be carried forward at Rs.93,39,11,564/- by holding

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S AMCO POWER SYSTEMS LTD

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

disallowance of lease rentals paid by it to the extent of Rs.2,08,080/-. The Tribunal, however dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, and partly allowed the appeal of the respondent-assessee by allowing the benefit of set-off of brought forward losses, but did not give the benefit of lease rentals paid by the assessee. Challenging the said order

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S AMCO POWER SYSTEMS LTD.,

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

disallowance of lease rentals paid by it to the extent of Rs.2,08,080/-. The Tribunal, however dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, and partly allowed the appeal of the respondent-assessee by allowing the benefit of set-off of brought forward losses, but did not give the benefit of lease rentals paid by the assessee. Challenging the said order

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S AMCO POWER SYSTEMS LTD.,

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

disallowance of lease rentals paid by it to the extent of Rs.2,08,080/-. The Tribunal, however dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, and partly allowed the appeal of the respondent-assessee by allowing the benefit of set-off of brought forward losses, but did not give the benefit of lease rentals paid by the assessee. Challenging the said order

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S AMCO POWER SYSTEMS LTD.,

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

disallowance of lease rentals paid by it to the extent of Rs.2,08,080/-. The Tribunal, however dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, and partly allowed the appeal of the respondent-assessee by allowing the benefit of set-off of brought forward losses, but did not give the benefit of lease rentals paid by the assessee. Challenging the said order

M/S. KARNATAKA INSTRADE CORPORATION LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

loss and depreciation against the income assessed for the year under appeal under any head? (6) Without prejudice, whether the Tribunal was justified in law in not holding that the above expenditure ought to have been allowed in the computation of income on the sale of the assets of the appellant? 10. Sri. A.Shankar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MPHASIS LTD

The appeal is dismissed accordingly

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

carrying on business of cotton exporter and done to cover up losses on account of differences in foreign exchange valuations, would not be speculative activity but a business activity.” In light of aforesaid judgment, this Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the disallowance of foreign exchange loss on forward

SMT. PUNEETHA @ PUNEETHA B. A. vs. SRI. D. RAVI

The appeal is dismissed accordingly

Bench: R DEVDAS

carrying on business of cotton exporter and done to cover up losses on account of differences in foreign exchange valuations, would not be speculative activity but a business activity.” In light of aforesaid judgment, this Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the disallowance of foreign exchange loss on forward

M/S J K INDUSTRIES LTD vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, all questions are answered against the

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation of the earlier years and by setting off these amounts, if any, before arriving at the total income of the assessee. 12. The other point canvassed by Sri Shankar is relating to the amount which qualifies as the export incentives under sub-section (1) of Section 80HHC and for the purpose of computing the same

SKF TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) P. LTD., vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The Appeal is disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

carry forward Date of Judgment 19-06-2018, ITA No.83/2017 SKF Technologies [India] P. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 6/9 of loss as assessed for A.Y.2006-07, for the impugned assessment year. Ground II(2) is allowed for statistical purpose. 26. Vide its ground II(3), grievance of the assessee is that disallowance

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S K B D SUGARS & DISTILLERIES LTD.,

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

disallowed the business loss and unabsorbed depreciation amounting to Rs.3,48,87,613/- as the same was the business loss from the business of power generation which was brought forward and claimed for set off. Challenging the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee-amalgamated company filed an appeal, which was allowed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Aggrieved

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. M/S CHALASSANI EDUCATION TRUST

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

carrying forward of the losses for being set off against the income of the charitable trust for the present Assessment Year, the controversy is covered by the judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and another .vs. Ohio University Christ College rendered on 17.07.2018 in ITA.No.312/2016 and ITA No.313/2016, in which this Court held as under

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF SOUTH KANARA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

carrying forward of the losses for being set off against the income of the charitable trust for the present Assessment Year, the controversy is covered by the judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and another Vs. Ohio University Christ College rendered on 17.07.2018 in ITA.No.312/2016 and ITA No.313/2016, in which this Court held as under

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. M/S. KARNATAKA FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLIES LTD

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

disallowance of claim of assessee for carry forward of brought forward losses of Rs.16,62,77,393/- for A.Y.2005-06 and Rs.23

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF SOUTH KANARA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

carrying forward of the losses for being set off against the income of the charitable trust for the present Assessment Year, the controversy is covered by the judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and another Vs. Ohio University Christ College rendered on 17.07.2018 in ITA.No.312/2016 and ITA No.313/2016, in which this Court held as under

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MC DOWELL AND CO LTD

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

loss suffered while surrendering the land had to be set off towards profit earned in the sale of the going concern. Therefore the Assessing Authority disallowed the claim of the assessee to carry forward

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ANJUMAN-E-ISLAM

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

carrying forward of the losses for being set off against the income of the charitable trust for the present Assessment Year, the controversy is covered by the judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) and another Vs. Ohio University Christ College rendered Date of Judgment 14 -08-2018 I.T.A.No.428/2018 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) & another Vs. M/s Anjuman

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. INDUS FILA LTD

In the result, the order passed by the Income Tax

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowed the claim of set off of loss of M/s Tulip Apparel Private Limited under Section 72(A) of the Act. The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who by an order dated 21.12.2010 inter alia held that effective date of amalgamation is 31.03.2008 and the addition made by the Assessing Officer was deleted