Section 32(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.33

Section 32(2) falls under section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 33 (Deduction for depreciation) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 33 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 32(2) is General Motors India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (25 Taxmann.com 364), cited in 46 of the 321 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 32(2)

General Motors India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
25 Taxmann.com 364 · 2012 · High Court
46
citing judgments

Section 44AB (tax audit) does not apply where the assessee is not engaged in a business or profession and consequently has no income under the head 'profits and gains from business or profession'.

Areva T & D India Ltd. v. DCIT
20 Taxmann.com 29 · 2012 · High Court
34
citing judgments

Specified intangible assets like business claims, information, records, contracts, employees, and know-how acquired under a slump sale are considered 'business or commercial rights' eligible for depreciation under section 32(1)(ii).

CIT(A) v. Haryana Hotels Ltd.
276 ITR 521 · 2005 · High Court
11
citing judgments

An assessee is not legally required to file a return within the time prescribed under Section 139(1) to carry forward and set off unabsorbed depreciation.

400 (SC)\nc. CIT v. Xylon
153 Taxmann.com 465 · 2023 · ITAT
7
citing judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax v. RFCI Ltd.
57 Taxmann.com 17 · 2015 · Reported
6
citing judgments
Pr. CIT v. Petrofils Co-operative Limited
130 Taxmann.com 191 · 2021 · Supreme Court
5
citing judgments
Pr. CIT v. Petrofils Co-operative Limited
130 Taxmann.com 190 · 2021 · High Court
4
citing judgments
CIT v. KMC Speciality Hospitals India Private Limited
130 Taxmann.com 215 · 2021 · High Court
4
citing judgments
CIT v. Govind Nagar Sugar Ltd.
334 ITR 13 · 2011 · High Court
4
citing judgments
CIT v. Estate & Finance Ltd.
111 ITR 119 · 1978 · High Court
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 32(2)

JCIT (OSD), Chennai vs. Sify Technologies Limited, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1793/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1650/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, Tax, Vs. Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 101. Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1793, 1794 & 1795/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, (Osd), Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034 Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Respondent: Shri.Homi Rajvangh, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

ACIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai vs. Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1902/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 1902/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 The Assistant Commissioner Of Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3(1), Vs. No. 12, Thambuswamy Road, Kilpauk, New Block, 4Th Floor, 121, Mahatma Chennai 600 010. Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, [Pan:Aabct0551H] Chennai 600 034. (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Mrs. Pavuna Sundari, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Selvamoorthy, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 11, Chennai Dated 14.03.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Directing The Assessing Officer To Allow The Assessee’S Claim Of Unabsorbed Depreciation To The Tune Of ₹.2,76,64,000/-.

For Appellant: Mrs. Pavuna Sundari, JCITFor Respondent: Shri P. Selvamoorthy, CA
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 32(2)

ACIT, Erode vs. Skm Egg Products Export (India) Limited, Erode

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 387/CHNY/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.G.Baskar, Adv
Section 10ASection 10BSection 150Section 28Section 32(1)Section 32(2)Section 72

ACIT, Erode vs. Skm Egg Products Export (India) Limited, Erode

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 386/CHNY/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.G.Baskar, Adv
Section 10ASection 10BSection 150Section 28Section 32(1)Section 32(2)Section 72

ACIT, Erode vs. Skm Egg Products Export (India) Limited, Erode

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 385/CHNY/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Nov 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.G.Baskar, Adv
Section 10ASection 10BSection 150Section 28Section 32(1)Section 32(2)Section 72

ACIT, Erode vs. Skm Egg Products Export (India) Limited, Erode

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 384/CHNY/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Nov 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.G.Baskar, Adv
Section 10ASection 10BSection 150Section 28Section 32(1)Section 32(2)Section 72

ACIT, Erode vs. Skm Egg Products Export (India) Limited, Erode

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 383/CHNY/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Nov 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.G.Baskar, Adv
Section 10ASection 10BSection 150Section 28Section 32(1)Section 32(2)Section 72

The Exchange Agencies, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 35(5), New Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3451/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Smt. Lalitha Krishnamurthy, CAFor Respondent: Sh. B.S. Anant, Sr. Dr
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32(2)Section 40a

DCIT, Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai vs. Comstar Automotive Technologies Pvt Ltd, Chengalpattu

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 209/CHNY/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 209/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2003-04 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. Comstar Automotive Corporate Circle – 1(2), Vs. Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Chennai – 600 034. Keelakarani Village, Malrosapuram Po, Maraimalai Nagar, Chengalpattu – 600 204. [Pan: Aaacm 2284P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Raghav Menon, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 108Section 10BSection 32(2)

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Fresenius Kabi India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2095/PUN/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2095/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghai
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 32(1)

Reshma Tools & Engg. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 3, Thane

ITA 801/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Sh. N. K. Pradahan, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 801/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri B. V. Jhaveri ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajora Satish C
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Karnataka Silk Industries Corporation Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2463/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Jason P. Boaz & Shri. Laliet Kumari.T.A No.2463/Bang/2017 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle – 4(1)(1), Bengaluru .. Appellant V. M/S. Karnataka Silk Industries Corporation Ltd, 3Rd & 4Th Floor, Public Utility Building, M. G. Road, Bengaluru 560 001 .. Respondent Pan : Aaack6554A Assessee By : Shri. Sachin Mehta, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Siddappaji R. N. Addl. Cit Heard On : 25.09.2018 Pronounced On : 28.09.2017 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar:

For Appellant: Shri. Sachin Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Siddappaji R. N. Addl. CIT
Section 32(2)

The Dy. CIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. Gujarat Water Resources Development Corpn. Ltd., Gandhinagar

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

ITA 716/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 32(2)

The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Panchmahal Steel Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

TAXAP/1157/2018HC Gujarat18 Sept 2018
Section 147Section 32(2)

DCIT CC 2(4), Mumbai vs. Ajmera Cements P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 228/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar SinghFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Jotwani
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32(2)

Malayalam Communication Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/145/2015HC Kerala13 Sept 2018
Section 32(2)

DCIT CC 6(1), Mumbai vs. Elder Projects Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 392/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prateek JainFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 32(2)

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Meritor Lvs India Pvt Ltd

ITA/68/2013HC Karnataka29 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 10ASection 260Section 70

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1644/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri O. A. MaoFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Naniwadekar
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 32(2)

Asst CIT 6(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Essar Infrastructjure Services Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 4018/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Asst. Cit 6(2)(2), M/S Essar Infrastructure – Room No. 563, Services Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Essar House, 11, K.K. Marg, Churchgate, Vs. Mahalaxmi, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400034 Pan: Aabce3527C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 25/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/08/2018

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (DR)
Section 143Section 14ASection 32Section 32(2)