What you're looking for is fasted training vs. unfasted training. It is sort of a religion in the fitness world with regards to whether or not it is beneficial. The question strictly focuses on fat loss, so that's what this answer will be about.
The logic states that when fasted (10+ hours without consuming any calories), the body does not have glycogen to use for the workout so it turns to other sources, fat and protein though (hopefully) mostly fat. There is some research to back that up.
Research using healthy young men has shown that doing aerobic exercise when fasting increases the use of stored fat as an energy supply. The reaction may be related to the low insulin levels that occur during fasting.
There is also some research stating that is does not help, like this one which states:
These findings indicate that body composition changes associated with aerobic exercise in conjunction with a hypocaloric diet are similar regardless whether or not an individual is fasted prior to training.
To answer the question:
Would it therefore be possible to reduce body fat while being in an overall daily calorie surplus?
Not likely. The reason is simple. If you burned more fat in the fasted state, then you'll have a big surplus of glycogen that you aren't using in the fed-and-resting state. The caloric surplus would then just go right back in to fat. If you work out in a fed state, you use primarily glycogen, then all your calories are front loaded to the beginning of the day. So you would have less glycogen at the end of the day so you'd use more fat. It all just balances out.
This is of course an oversimplification. There is absolutely no way of knowing exactly what percentages of fat, carbs, protein your body uses during a workout or rest.
If not, would it be advisable to consume no or very little breakfast before the cycling?
Looking at a strictly fat loss perspective, I don't think there'd be any benefit one way or the other.