Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2005 (10) TMI 70 - HC - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        High Court Upholds Section 32AB Deduction Method: No Inter-Business Loss Setoff Allowed The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that the deduction under section 32AB should be based on the profits of the paper division alone without ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          High Court Upholds Section 32AB Deduction Method: No Inter-Business Loss Setoff Allowed

                          The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that the deduction under section 32AB should be based on the profits of the paper division alone without setting off the loss from the agro division. The Court emphasized that the provision does not allow for setting off losses from one eligible business against the profits of another. The Court highlighted that the method prescribed involves determining profits of each eligible business separately. The appeal was dismissed in favor of the assessee, ruling against the Revenue's argument for setting off losses from another eligible unit.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Whether the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) in directing the Assessing Officer to allow deduction under section 32AB based on profits from the paper division alone, without considering the loss of the agro unit.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          Issue 1: Deduction under Section 32AB Based on Profits from Paper Division Alone

                          The core issue in this case pertains to the interpretation of section 32AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, specifically whether the deduction under this section should be calculated based solely on the profits of the paper division without setting off the loss from the agro division.

                          The assessee, a public limited company, operates two separate units: a paper division and an agro division. Both units are "eligible businesses" under section 32AB. The assessee maintained separate accounts for each unit, preparing individual profit and loss accounts and balance sheets as per the Companies Act, 1956. For the assessment year 1990-91, the paper division reported a net profit of Rs. 4,42,22,227, while the agro division reported a loss of Rs. 97,80,642. The assessee claimed a deduction under section 32AB for the paper division, amounting to Rs. 88,44,445, which is 20% of the profits from the paper division.

                          The Assessing Officer (AO) argued that the 20% limit for the deduction should be calculated after setting off the loss from the agro division, thus restricting the deduction to Rs. 68,88,353. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and subsequently the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the assessee's claim, stating that the deduction should be based on the profits of the paper division alone, without considering the loss from the agro division.

                          The Revenue's contention was that under section 32AB(3)(a), the profits should be determined in accordance with Parts II and III of the VI Schedule to the Companies Act, 1956, encompassing all activities of the assessee. Therefore, the deduction should consider the net profits after setting off the losses from any other eligible business.

                          Section 32AB(3)(a) specifies that when separate accounts are maintained, the profits of the eligible business should be computed after deducting depreciation and making certain adjustments as per the Companies Act. The Revenue argued that this should include setting off losses from other eligible units. However, the Tribunal and the Commissioner (Appeals) relied on the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Canara Workshops P. Ltd., which supported the assessee's stance of not setting off losses from another eligible unit.

                          The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that section 32AB(3)(a) does not provide for setting off losses from one eligible business against the profits of another. The Court noted that the method prescribed under section 32AB(3)(a) involves several steps to determine the profits of each eligible business separately, without any provision for setting off inter-unit losses. The Court also highlighted that the amendment by the Finance Act, 1989, effective from April 1, 1991, removed the concept of eligible business and the relevance of maintaining separate accounts for the purpose of deduction under section 32AB. However, for the assessment year 1990-91, the deduction had to be determined based on the profits of each eligible business separately.

                          The Court concluded that the profits of the paper division should be considered independently for the deduction under section 32AB, without setting off the loss from the agro division. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the question was answered in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found