9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1027X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The dispute pertains to availability of benefit of deduction under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Appellate Tribunal had rejected the claim of the appellant vide impugned order with the following observations: "5. Heard both sides. Perused orders of lower authorities and the decisions relied on. We find that the issue in appeal has been decided by the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of S.R.A.Systems Ltd.(supra) following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Himatsingka Seide Ltd.(supra). The co-ordinate Bench while deciding the issue held that unabsorbed depreciation has to be set off before computing exemption allowable under Section 10A of the Act observing as under:- "7. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. (supra) still holds good. Accordingly, the assessee can claim deduction u/s. 10A before setting off of brought forward losses. In view of the above, this ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 6. Respectfully following the above decision of the Tribunal, we allow the grounds raised by the Revenue. 7. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed." 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has relied on the following decision of this Court :- (i) M/s.Comstar Automative Techonologies Private Limited (formerly known as Visteon Powertrain Control Systems India Private Limited, Keelakaranai Village, Malrosapuram Post, Maraimalai N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Revenue is totally against the said law as has been declared by the Hon-ble Apex Court in the aforesaid decision in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Yokogawa India Ltd., (cited supra). 30. Therefore we have no hesitation to hold that, the decision of the ITAT, which is impugned herein, would not stand in the legal scrutiny, in view of the law having been declared by the Hon-ble Apex Court. Therefore, we are of the view that, the Substantial Question of Law raised in this Appeal is covered by the said decision, therefore, it can be answered accordingly 5. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Vs. SRA Systems Limited in (2021) 129 taxmann.com 118 (Madras), the Court upheld the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee submitted that following the judgments referred above, the questions of law may be decided in favour of the assessee and the appeal may be dismissed. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, following the decision of this court dated 02.03.2021 made in T.C.A.No.975 of 2010 [cited supra], the Questions of Law are decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The appeal is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Tax Case Appeal is dismissed. No costs." 6. Both the learned counsel for the appellant and also learned counsel for the respondent have submitted that as on date, the issue stands covered in favour of the appellant in terms of above decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
