2019 (4) TMI 369

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... contrary to the provisions of the Act and facts of the case and hence ought to be quashed. 2. The learned AO, based on the directions of Hon'ble Dispute Resolution Panel, Mumbai ('DRP'), erred in computing income of the Appellant by first setting off unabsorbed depreciation from business income and then allowing deduction under section 10AA of the Act, thereby restricting the deduction under section 10AA of the Act to Rs. 1,64,96,849/- as against Rs. 2,26,71,225/- claimed by the Appellant. 3. The learned AO erred in considering income from other sources at Rs. 506,539/- as against Rs. 55,244/- disclosed in the return of income, without providing any reasons whatsoever. 4. Each one of the above grounds of appeal is without prejudice t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the said claim of deduction under section 10AA of the Act. 7. In the preceding year i.e. assessment year 2011-12, such position of curtailment of deduction under section 10AA of the Act by first setting off of unabsorbed depreciation against business income, arose in the hands of assessee, consequent to order passed by the Commissioner under section 263 of the Act. The Tribunal after considering various aspects of the issue observed that the issue stands covered by the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT & Anr. Vs. M/s. Yokogawa India Ltd. reported in 341 ITR 385 (SC) had held that deduction under section 10AA of the Act is to be computed / allowed before reducing the total income to the extent of unabsorbed depreciation of earlier....