Tribunal allows set-off of unabsorbed depreciation under Income Tax Act

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, allowing the set off of unabsorbed depreciation against the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized that unabsorbed depreciation should be treated as current year depreciation and allowed to be set off against other heads of income, following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various High Courts. The appeal of the revenue was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s order.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Set off of carried forward depreciation against the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Classification of income under various heads as per Section 14 of the Income Tax Act.
3. Applicability of Section 71 for set off of losses against income from other heads.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Set off of Carried Forward Depreciation Against Addition Made Under Section 68:

The primary issue revolves around whether the assessee can set off unabsorbed carried forward depreciation against the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee declared a total income of Rs. Nil after adjusting brought forward losses. The Assessing Officer (AO) added Rs. 3,99,00,000/- as unproved cash credits under Section 68, determining a gross total income of Rs. 6,42,31,119/-. The AO allowed the set off of unabsorbed brought forward business loss and depreciation but denied the set off of unabsorbed carried forward depreciation loss from the income assessed. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] allowed the appeal, holding that once the income is treated as part of gross total income, the unabsorbed carried forward depreciation has to be allowed as set off from such total income.

2. Classification of Income Under Various Heads as Per Section 14:

The CIT(A) and the Tribunal emphasized that income required to be assessed under Section 14 of the IT Act under any one of the heads of income from A to E. If the addition under Section 68 does not fit into any of these heads, it should be considered as "income from other sources" and included in the gross total income. The Tribunal referred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kalekhan Mohd. Hanif Vs. CIT, which stated that the expression 'nature and source' requires identification and genuineness of the source. The Tribunal also cited the Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Chensing Ventures, which held that losses under any head of income could be set off against income under any other head, except for capital gains.

3. Applicability of Section 71 for Set Off of Losses Against Income from Other Heads:

The Tribunal noted that Section 71 permits an assessee to set off losses other than capital gains against income from other heads. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs. Shilpa Dyeing & Printing Mills (P) Ltd. supported this view. The Tribunal also referred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Mother India Refrigeration Industries Private Ltd., which held that unabsorbed carried forward depreciation partakes the character of current year depreciation in the following year, making it available for set off against other heads of income. The Tribunal concluded that the AO must allow the set off of unabsorbed depreciation once the addition is included in the gross total income.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, allowing the set off of unabsorbed depreciation against the addition made under Section 68. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s well-reasoned order and dismissed the revenue's appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that unabsorbed depreciation should be treated as current year depreciation and allowed to be set off against other heads of income, following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various High Courts. The appeal of the revenue was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s order.

---