M/S VODAFONE EAST LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

loss and unabsorbed depreciation was prepared in the said order where it was clearly shown that the “Profit” of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 crore is required to be set off against the brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore and only the balance unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore – 8.84 crore = Rs.28.51 crore can be carried

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA vs. HUTCHISON TELECOM EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

loss and unabsorbed depreciation was prepared in the said order where it was clearly shown that the “Profit” of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 crore is required to be set off against the brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore and only the balance unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore – 8.84 crore = Rs.28.51 crore can be carried

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

loss and unabsorbed depreciation was prepared in the said order where it was clearly shown that the “Profit” of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 crore is required to be set off against the brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore and only the balance unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore – 8.84 crore = Rs.28.51 crore can be carried

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD.,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

loss and unabsorbed depreciation was prepared in the said order where it was clearly shown that the “Profit” of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 crore is required to be set off against the brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore and only the balance unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore – 8.84 crore = Rs.28.51 crore can be carried

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

loss and unabsorbed depreciation was prepared in the said order where it was clearly shown that the “Profit” of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 crore is required to be set off against the brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore and only the balance unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore – 8.84 crore = Rs.28.51 crore can be carried

DCIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

loss and unabsorbed depreciation was prepared in the said order where it was clearly shown that the “Profit” of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 crore is required to be set off against the brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore and only the balance unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore – 8.84 crore = Rs.28.51 crore can be carried

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

loss and unabsorbed depreciation was prepared in the said order where it was clearly shown that the “Profit” of FY 2002-03 of Rs.8.84 crore is required to be set off against the brought forward depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore and only the balance unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.37.35 crore – 8.84 crore = Rs.28.51 crore can be carried

DCIT, C.C.XXVII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. BUDGE BUDGE REFINERIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s CO is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasusdevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

loss of Assessment Year 1992-93 can be carried forward to Assessment year 2001-02. In view of the above mentioned judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court the correct position of such carry forward of depreciation

D.C.I.T CIR - 11,KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S EPCOS INDIA PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals as well as the cross objections are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

depreciation against the income for the relevant year and hence in the return the same was claimed to be carried forward. The details of brought forward loss

DCIT,CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ALL INDIA TECHNOLOGIES LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2009-10

depreciation subsisting as on 1-4-2002, can be carried forward indefinitely. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Reliance Jute and Industries (120 ITR 921 Supreme Court Decision) has held that carry forward & set off of unabsorbed loss

I.T.O WD - 7(2),KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S WINSOME BREWERIES LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

Depreciation loss should be carried forward. The CIT(A) has rightly allowed the claim of unabsorbed depreciation loss of the assessee

DCIT, CENTRAL CIR. VI, KOLKATA vs. M/S J.K. LAKSHMI CEMENT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s CO is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Partha Sarathi Chowdhury

carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation loss to a period of 8 years was curtailed and the same was brought at par with

ACIT, CEN. CIR-VI, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S J. K. TYRE & INDUSTRIES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 143/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2008-09

depreciation allowance not so set off shall be carried forward to the following assessment year not being more than eight assessment years immediately succeeding the assessment year for which the aforesaid allowance was first computed : Provided that the business or profession for which the allowance was originally computed continued to be carried on by him in the previous year relevant

METSIL EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, CEN. -2, KOLKATA

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

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

depreciation allowance which has been carried forward or to unabsorbed development rebate which has been carried forward from the immediately preceding Page 4 of 8 I.T.A. No.: 929/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Metsil Exports Pvt. Ltd. assessment year, must be rejected. In our opinion, on a pure grammatical construction, in view of the reference to the chapter, incurring of losses

D.C.I.T CIR - 1,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S THE INDIA JUTE & INDUSTRIES LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganeshita No. 802/Kol/2013 A.Y 2007-08 D.C.I.T, Circle-1, Kolkata Vs. M/S. The India Jute & Industries Ltd Pan: Aabct1896P (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation for the Asst Years 2000-01 & 2001-02 is allowed to be carried forward upto Asst Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 respectively and to be set off only against the business income. - the balance unabsorbed brought forward business loss

M/S. MILLENNIUM STOCK BROKING (P) LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

carried forward for set off in subsequent years. As far as the unabsorbed depreciation is concerned, since the total brought forward business loss

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. JCT LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

depreciation Carried forward 357419009 357419009 - Add: 2008-09 Loss for 613634061 435555538 178078523 the year Carried forward 971053070 792974547 178078523 Add: 2009-10 Loss

BALAGERIA CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE LTD.,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-27(1), HALDIA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2320/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Balageria Central Cooperative Ltd Vs Acit, Circle-27(1), Haldia Saraswatitala, Contai, Ho, Contai Dist: Purba Medinipur, W.B. Pan No. :Aaalb 0087 A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Mrinmay Basak, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 26.09.2024, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1069142040(1) For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ld.Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Mrinmay Basak, Ld.Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Original Assessment Came To Be Completed U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 20.04.2021. It Was The Submission That The Assessment Was Initiated For One Of The Grounds Being The Refund Claim, Most Specifically, Ratio Of The Refund Claimed To The Income Of The Assessee. It Was The Submission That The Said Assessment Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Act Was A Subject Matter Of Suo Moto Rectification By The Ld. Assessing Officer. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That In The Rectification Order The Assessing Officer Mentions That The Assessee Has Filed His

carried forward depreciation loss as also the depreciation loss of current year. It was the submission that this was also