Madras High Court Allows Assessee's Appeal in Income Tax Case — Unabsorbed Depreciation Set-off Against Section 69 Addition Upheld. Addition of Unaccounted Stock Treated as Business Income Under Section 32(2) of Income-Tax Act, 1961.

High Court: Madras High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 10
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves an appeal by M/s.Sivasakthi Threads (assessee) against the order of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal which upheld the rejection of the assessee's claim for set-off of unabsorbed depreciation against an addition made under Section 69 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The background is that a search was conducted under Section 132 on one Periyasamy on 27.09.2006, and a simultaneous survey under Section 133A was conducted at the assessee's premises. Based on seized records, an assessment was completed for AY 2007-08 under Section 143(3) read with Section 153C on 30.12.2008, making an addition of Rs.31,83,700/- as unaccounted stock. The assessee filed a rectification application under Section 154 seeking set-off of unabsorbed depreciation loss of Rs.11,06,525/- and credit for advance tax of Rs.6.00 lakhs. The Assessing Authority allowed the credit for advance tax but rejected the set-off, holding that the addition under Section 69 is deemed income not falling under 'Profits and Gains of Business or Profession' (PGBP), and thus Section 32(2) which allows set-off only against PGBP income does not apply. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and then to the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, both of which upheld the rejection. The legal issue before the High Court was whether unabsorbed depreciation can be set off against an addition under Section 69 representing unaccounted stock. The assessee argued that the addition is intrinsically linked to business operations and should be treated as business income. The respondent contended that Section 69 income is deemed income and not business income. The High Court analyzed the nature of the addition and held that the unaccounted stock is directly related to the business of the assessee and thus the addition retains the character of business income. The Court relied on the principle that Section 32(2) allows set-off of unabsorbed depreciation against profits and gains of business, and since the addition is in the nature of business income, the set-off is permissible. The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the lower authorities, and directed the Assessing Authority to give effect to the set-off of unabsorbed depreciation against the addition.

Headnote

A) Income Tax - Set-off of Unabsorbed Depreciation - Section 32(2) read with Section 69, Income-Tax Act, 1961 - The assessee claimed set-off of unabsorbed depreciation loss against addition made under Section 69 for unaccounted stock - The Assessing Authority rejected the claim holding that Section 69 income is deemed income not falling under 'Profits and Gains of Business or Profession' - The High Court held that the addition of unaccounted stock is intrinsically linked to business operations and retains character of business income - Therefore, unabsorbed depreciation can be set off against such income under Section 32(2) - Held that the assessee is entitled to set-off of unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.11,06,525/- against the addition of Rs.31,83,700/- (Paras 1-12)

B) Income Tax - Rectification of Mistake - Section 154, Income-Tax Act, 1961 - The assessee filed a rectification application seeking set-off of unabsorbed depreciation which was rejected by the Assessing Authority - The High Court allowed the appeal and directed the Assessing Authority to give effect to the set-off - Held that the mistake was apparent from the record as the addition under Section 69 was in the nature of business income (Paras 5-12)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether unabsorbed depreciation loss under Section 32(2) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 can be set off against an addition made under Section 69 of the Act representing unaccounted stock in business

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal and the lower authorities, and directed the Assessing Authority to give effect to the set-off of unabsorbed depreciation of Rs.11,06,525/- against the addition of Rs.31,83,700/-.

Law Points

  • Unabsorbed depreciation can be set off against deemed income under Section 69 if the addition is in the nature of business income
  • Section 32(2) allows set-off against profits and gains of business or profession
  • Section 69 income is deemed income but retains character of business income if arising from business operations
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026:MHC:775

T.C.A.No.48 of 2013

2026-01-23

Dr. Anita Sumanth, Mummineni Sudheer Kumar

2026:MHC:775

Mr.R.Sivaraman, Mr.V.Mahalingam

M/s.Sivasakthi Threads

The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle III, Coimbatore

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal rejecting the claim of set-off of unabsorbed depreciation against current year loss.

Remedy Sought

The assessee sought set-off of unabsorbed depreciation loss of Rs.11,06,525/- against the addition of Rs.31,83,700/- made under Section 69, and consequential reduction of tax liability.

Filing Reason

The Assessing Authority rejected the set-off claim in rectification proceedings under Section 154, and the appellate authorities upheld the rejection.

Previous Decisions

The Assessing Authority rejected the rectification application on 19.02.2010; the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal upheld the rejection.

Issues

Whether unabsorbed depreciation loss under Section 32(2) can be set off against an addition made under Section 69 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 representing unaccounted stock in business.

Submissions/Arguments

The assessee argued that the addition of unaccounted stock is intrinsically linked to business operations and should be treated as business income, thus eligible for set-off under Section 32(2). The respondent contended that the addition under Section 69 is deemed income and does not fall under the head 'Profits and Gains of Business or Profession', hence set-off is not permissible.

Ratio Decidendi

An addition made under Section 69 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 for unaccounted stock in business retains the character of business income as it arises from business operations. Therefore, unabsorbed depreciation under Section 32(2) can be set off against such addition, as Section 32(2) allows set-off against profits and gains of business or profession.

Judgment Excerpts

This is an appeal at the instance of the assessee challenging concurrent orders of the authorities rejecting the claim of set-off of unabsorbed depreciation as against current year loss. The addition made in the order of assessment represented investments of the assessee that had not been recorded in the books of account. The addition of unaccounted stock is intrinsically linked to business operations and retains character of business income.

Procedural History

Search under Section 132 on 27.09.2006; survey under Section 133A; assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 153C on 30.12.2008 for AY 2007-08; rectification application under Section 154 filed; rejected on 19.02.2010; appeal to CIT(A) dismissed; appeal to ITAT dismissed; present appeal under Section 260A filed.

Acts & Sections

  • Income-Tax Act, 1961: 32(2), 69, 132, 133A, 143(3), 153C, 154, 260A
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Allows Assessee's Appeal in Income Tax Case — Unabsorbed Depreciation Set-off Against Section 69 Addition Upheld. Addition of Unaccounted Stock Treated as Business Income Under Section 32(2) of Income-Tax Act, 1961.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Refusal to Implead Third Party in Arbitration — Section 37(2)(a) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Does Not Encompass Orders on Impleadment. Denial of impleadment of a third party as a veritable pa...