Chettinad Quartz Products Limited Vs ACIT (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that benefit of section 10B of the Income Tax Act available even before setting off of unabsorbed depreciation and brought-forward losses. Accordingly, matter decided in favour of assessee.
Facts- The appellant is before this Court aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 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 by observing that unabsorbed depreciation has to be set off before computing exemption allowable under Section 10A of the Act
Conclusion- Held that since the issue is covered in favour of the appellant and considering the fact that the similar fact was decided in favour of the appellant by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘B’ Bench, Chennai vide order dated 23.07.2012, which is the appellant’s own case relating to the assessment year 2007-08 in I.T.A.No.1180/Mds/2012, we are inclined to answer the appeal in favour of the appellant.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
The appellant is before this Court aggrieved by the impugned order dated 16.10.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘A’ Bench, Chennai for the assessment year 2008-09.
