TATA CHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that sales tax incentives and fertilizer subsidies received by the assessee are income derived from the business of the eligible industrial undertaking and are eligible for deduction under Section 80-IB.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80-IB for its fertilizer unit, including sales tax incentives and fertilizer subsidies. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) disallowed these amounts, holding they were not derived from the industrial undertaking's business.
What were the issues?
Whether sales tax incentives and fertilizer subsidies are income derived from the business of an industrial undertaking eligible for deduction under Section 80-IB.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 80-IB,Section 28(iii)(b),Section 56
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(14)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- K.P. Varghese v. ITO989 citing7 Taxmann 13 · 1981 · SC
- CIT v. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.577 citing174 Taxmann 87 · 2008 · SC · Read judgment
- Liberty India v. CIT571 citing317 ITR 218 · 2009 · SC · Read judgment
- Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT353 citing129 Taxmann 539 · 2003 · SC
- Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association328 citing121 ITR 1 · 1980 · SC
- Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT323 citing101 ITR 796 · 1975 · SC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Sterling Foods311 citing237 ITR 579 · 1999 · SC · Read judgment
- Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT245 citing113 ITR 84 · 1978 · SC · Read judgment
- Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT155 citing97 ITR 615 · 1973 · SC
- CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers136 citing400 ITR 279 · 2018 · SC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd.53 citing364 ITR 88 · 2014 · HC
- Mepco Industries Ltd. v. CIT50 citing319 ITR 208 · 2009 · SC · Read judgment
- Merinoply & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT43 citing209 ITR 508 · 1994 · HC
- However, in CIT v. Andaman Timber Industries Ltd.29 citing109 Taxmann 135 · 2000 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J” BENCH, MUMBAI
PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM:
This appeal is recalled by order of the coordinate bench in Miscellaneous Application number 136/M/2021 in ITA number 2439/M/2011 for assessment year 2003 – 04 passed on 17/9/2021 wherein as per paragraph number 12 it has been held that additional ground raised by the assessee number 3 with respect to the taxability of sales tax incentive whether is an income chargeable to tax and, if yes, whether same is eligible for deduction u/s 80 IB of the income tax act as well as part of ground number 5 whether the fertilizer subsidy provided by the government as per price concession was an Tata Chemicals Ltd.; AY 03-04 income eligible for deduction u/s 80 IB of the income tax act, has not been decided. Therefore,
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.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- M/S. Nanda Mint & Pine Chemicals Ltd., New… vs ACIT, New DelhiDelhi8 Apr 2016Partly Allowed
Also relies on However, in CIT v. Andaman Timber Industries Ltd. and 2 other authorities
The Tribunal held that excise duty refunds are eligible for deduction under Section 80IB as they are derived from the industrial undertaking. It also found that sales to the sister concern were at arm's length prices, ju...
- Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs Addl Ciat 2(3), MumbaiMumbai10 Nov 2023Partly Allowed
Also relies on Mepco Industries Ltd. v. CIT and 2 other authorities
The tribunal allowed the assessee's claim regarding project expenditures being revenue in nature once abandoned, following High Court decisions. Other grounds were either dismissed or not pressed.
- Income Tax Officer 1 (1), Indore vs M/S Agya Auto Limited, IndoreIndore9 Feb 2021Dismissed
Also relies on Mepco Industries Ltd. v. CIT and 2 other authorities
The Tribunal held that the VAT subsidy received by the assessee was capital in nature, intended to meet capital investment for setting up a new unit in a backward area. Therefore, it was not taxable as revenue receipt.
- Candor Gurgaon Two Developers and Project… vs ACIT, Circle- 5(2), New DelhiDelhi14 Jun 2023Allowed
Also relies on However, in CIT v. Andaman Timber Industries Ltd. and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that disallowances under Section 14A require specific satisfaction from the AO and cannot automatically be applied under Rule 8D. It also ruled that Section 14A disallowances are notional and cannot be ...
- Candor Kolkata One Hi- Tech Structures Pvt… vs ACIT, Circle-5(2), New DelhiDelhi14 Jun 2023Allowed
Also relies on However, in CIT v. Andaman Timber Industries Ltd. and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that disallowances under Section 14A require specific satisfaction from the Assessing Officer and cannot be automatically applied under Rule 8D without considering actual expenditure. It also ruled that...
More judgments on Section 80-IB
- Zf Steering Gear (India) Limited, Pune vs DCIT Central Circle-15 Delhi, New DelhiITA 4383/DEL/2026[2004-05]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2004-05
- Zf Steering Gear (India) Limited, Pune vs DCIT Central Circle-15, Delhi, New DelhiITA 4382/DEL/2026[2003-04]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2003-04
- Zf Steering Gear (India) Limited, Pune vs DCIT Central Circle-15, New DelhiITA 4381/DEL/2026[2002-03]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2002-03
- Zf Steering Gear (India) Limited, New Delhi vs DCIT Central Circle-15, New DelhiITA 4380/DEL/2026[2001-02]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2001-02
- Zf Steering Gear (India) Limited, India vs DCIT, Central Circle - 15, DelhiITA 4379/DEL/2026[2000-01]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2000-01
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026