BANSAL PATHWAYS DAMOH KATNI PRIVATE LIMITED,BANSAL ONE vs. CIT-1(1), AAYKAR BHAWAN
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that principles of natural justice were violated as the AO passed an order without affording an opportunity of hearing. Therefore, the disallowance of Rs. 1,04,49,307/- was also restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed a deduction under Section 80-IA, which was disallowed by the AO. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance of Rs. 1,04,49,307/- while remanding other issues back to the AO. The assessee appealed, arguing that the AO passed an order giving effect without providing an opportunity for hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether the AO's order giving effect was valid without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, and if the disallowance of Section 80-IA deduction should be re-examined.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by the order of first appeal dated 29.09.2025 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of the assessment-order dated 04.03.2025 passed by learned DCIT-1(1), Bhopal [“Ld. AO”] u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 250 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2020-21, the assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds:
M/s Bansal Pathways Damoh Katni Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 908/Ind/2025 – AY 2020-21
“1.0 That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in disallowing claim of deduction of Rs. 1,04,49,307/- in respect of income of business der
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 80-IA
- ACIT-Circle 6(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7767/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- ACIT-Circle6(1)(1) Mumbai., Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7766/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- DCIT, Central Circle- 2(4), Chennai vs Eco Protection Engineers Private Limited…ITA 597/CHNY/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed18 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Shyam Metalics and Energy Limited, Kolkata vs DCIT, Central Circle 1(1), KolkataITTPA 12/KOL/2026[2022-2023]Status: Heard11 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- State Bank of India, Mumbai vs ACIT-Circle- 2(2)(1), MumbaiITA 3429/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed11 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026