2020 (1) TMI 1042 - HC - Income Tax

Carry forward and set-off unabsorbed depreciation - claim of carry forward and set-off unabsorbed depreciation of assessment year 1995-96 to 1999-2000 against the profits of assessment year 2008-09 - HELD THAT - The issues raised in the present appeal are no longer res-integra as those are squarely covered by decision of this Court in the case of General Motors India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT 2012 (8) TMI 714 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against ITAT order for assessment year 2008-2009.
- Allowance of carry forward and set-off unabsorbed depreciation from assessment years 1995-96 to 1999-2000 against profits of 2008-09.
- Interpretation of Section 32(2) of the Income Tax Act regarding the period for carry forward and set-off of unabsorbed depreciation.
- Application of the decision in General Motors India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT in dismissing the appeal.

Analysis:
1. The Tax Appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for the assessment year 2008-2009. The appeal questioned the allowance of carry forward and set-off of unabsorbed depreciation from assessment years 1995-96 to 1999-2000 against the profits of 2008-09.

2. The Revenue proposed several questions of law regarding the ITAT's decision, particularly focusing on the interpretation of Section 32(2) of the Income Tax Act. The questions raised concerns about the legality and factual accuracy of allowing the assessee's claim for the carry forward and set-off of unabsorbed depreciation, especially in light of the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2001.

3. The Court noted that the issues raised in the appeal were already settled by a previous decision in the case of General Motors India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT. The Tribunal had also relied on this decision in dismissing the Revenue's appeal and upholding the order passed by the CIT(Appeals).

4. Consequently, the Court found that the appeal lacked merit as the matter had already been conclusively addressed in the earlier decision. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed based on the precedent set by the General Motors India case, which was deemed applicable and decisive in the current scenario.