Section 72A of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.116

Section 72A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 116 (Treatment of accumulated losses and unabsorbed depreciation in amalgamation or demerger, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 116 of the 2025 Act

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

92 judgments on BharatTax turn on Section 72A.

Judgments on Section 72A

India Pistons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 2340/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2339 & 2340/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12. M/S. India Pistons Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Huzur Gardens, Income Tax, Sembium, Corporate Circle 2(2) Chennai 600 011. Chennai.

For Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, IRS, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)

India Pistons Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 2339/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

For Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, IRS, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Jain Irrigation System Ltd., Jalgaon

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

ITA 1184/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

For Appellant: Shri Prashant MaheshwariFor Respondent: Mrs. Nandia Kanchan

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 72A

Embio Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD) 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2629/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosain: A.Y : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: Ms. S.Padmaja, Pooja Swaroop &

Section 143(3)Section 72ASection 80G

Embio Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal for Ay 2013-14 are allowed

ITA 2460/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhembio Limited Acit-15(1)(2), 501, 5Th Floor, Sentinel, Aayakar Bhavan, Hiranandani Garden, Mumbai-400020. Powai, Vs. Mumbai-400076. Pan: Aaace1154C Appellant Respondent Embio Limited Acit-15(1)(1), 501, 5Th Floor, Sentinel, Aayakar Bhavan, Hiranandani Garden, Mumbai-400020. Powai, Vs. Mumbai-400076. Pan: Aaace1154C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Paresh Shaparia (Ar) Respondent By : Shri D.G. Pansari (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.04.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Paresh Shaparia (AR)For Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari (DR)

Section 254(1)Section 35Section 35(1)(i)Section 37(1)Section 72ASection 72A(2)(iii)

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Beeyu Overseas Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 629/KOL/2016[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2019AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara] I.T.A. No. 628/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2002-03 I.T.A. No. 629/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Jcit (Osd), Circle-4(1), Kolkata…………...................................................….…………..…......Appellant M/S. Beeyu Overseas Ltd....……………………………………....………………..……………………Respondent 64A, Ballygunge Circular Road Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Aabcb 3327 K] Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri C.J. Singh, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

Section 250Section 35DSection 72ASection 80H

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Beeyu Overseas Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 628/KOL/2016[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2019AY 2002-2003

Section 250Section 35DSection 72ASection 80H

The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Vini Cosmetic Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 796/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri B. P. Srivastava, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin Shah and Bhadresh Gandhakwal, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 72A(2)

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Adm Agro Industries Dharwad Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands

ITA 5006/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs M/S Adm Agro Industries Circle 1(2), New Delhi. Dharwad Pvt. Ltd., (Previously Known As Tinna Agro Industries Ltd.), B-1, Khaitan House, Defence Colony, New Delhi-110065 (Appellant) (Respondent) Department By: Shri Sridhar Dora, Sr. Dr Assessee By: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate Ms Ananya Kapoor, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 15.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.01.2019

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar Dora, Sr. DR

Section 72ASection 72A(2)

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2096/PUN/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2096/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle- 1(2), .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pune. बनाम / V/S. Fresenius Kabi India Pvt. Ltd., Heritage House, 6 – E, Ramabai Ambedkar Road, Pune. ……""यथ" / Respondent Pan : Aaacf2614E Revenue By : Smt. Amrita Mishra, Cit Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01.01.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Pune Dated 02.06.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Are As Under :- “1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Is Contrary To Law & To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Grossly Erred In Allowing Set Off Of Unabsorbed Depreciation To The Tune Of Rs.30 Crs. 3. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Grossly Erred In Allowing The Ground In Favour Of Assessee Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 72A Of The Act. 4. For These & Such Other Grounds As May Be Urged At The Time Of Hearing, The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) May Be Vacated & That Of The Assessing Officer Be Restored.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Smt. Amrita Mishra, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 72A

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Adm Agro Industries Dharwad Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5949/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyi.T.A. No.5949/Del/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Vs Adm Agro Industries Dharwad P. Ltd. Circle 1(1), New Delhi. B-1, Khaitan House, Defence Colony, New Delhi. Pan: Aacct0343A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, Cit Dr Respondent By: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 31.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.11.2018 Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, Jm Challenging The Order Dated 05.8.2015 In Appeal No.7/2014-15 By Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1, New Delhi {For Short “Ld.Cit(A)”} For Asstt. Year 2011-12, Revenue Preferred This Appeal. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Relevant For Disposal Of This Appeal, Are That One M/S Kng Guruswamy Oil Mills Was Amalgamated With The Assessee On 01/04/2007. In The Computation Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate

Section 72Section 72A

DCIT 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Brandon & Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1972/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Shri D.G. Pansari, DRFor Respondent: Shri M M Golvala

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 72Section 74

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 vs. Adani Retail Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

TAXAP/521/2018HC Gujarat11 Jun 2018

Section 72ASection 72A(4)(a)Section 72A(4)(b)

Electrocast Sales India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, CC-Xxi, Kolkata

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

ITA 2145/KOL/2014[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Mar 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2145/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Electrocast Sales India Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Cc-Xxi, Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 5671 N] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 72ASection 79

Sequent Scientific Ltd, Thane vs. Asst CIT RG 3(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4902/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4902/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sequent Scientific Limited Asstt. Commissioner Of Income- बिधम/ 116, Vardhaman Industrial Tax Range-3(3), Aayakar Bhawan, Estate, Lbs Marg, Gokul Vs. Mumbai. Nagar, Thane 400 601. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacv1501G (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी /Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri H.P. Mahajani &For Respondent: Shri V.Vidyadhar, D.R

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 72A

M/S. Healthcare Global Enterprises Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 is dismissed

ITA 1901/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.R. Ramesh, JCIT (DR)

Section 72ASection 79

M/S. Healthcare Global Enterprises Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 is dismissed

ITA 1900/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.R. Ramesh, JCIT (DR)

Section 72ASection 79

ITO, Ward - 1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Gkw Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 459/KOL/2012[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2017AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh, I.T.A. No. 459/Kol/2012 Assessment Years: 1996-97

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(3)

M/S. Mcdowell & Company Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Karnataka Central, Bangalore

CIVIL APPEAL No. 3893/2006Supreme Court09 Mar 2017

Bench: 2 Judges

Section 41Section 41(1)Section 72A

Mcdowell & Company Ltd vs. Commnr. of Income-Tax, Bangalore

The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed

C.A. No.-003893-003893 - 2006Supreme Court09 Mar 2017

Bench: The Board For Industrial & Financial Reconstruction (Bifr) Under Sick Industrial Companies Act (Sica). At That 1 Digitally Signed By Nidhi Ahuja Date: 2017.08.31 15:02:11 Ist Reason: Signature Not Verified

Section 391Section 41(1)Section 72Section 72A