JAYDEEP PETRO CHEM CO. PVT.LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORP. WARD-2(3), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that contractual workers engaged by the assessee should be counted towards the minimum of 10 workers required for the deduction. The Tribunal also found that the volume of sales indicated that contractual workers were indeed involved in manufacturing activities.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80IB(2)(iv) for AYs 2006-07 and 2007-08. The AO denied the deduction, stating the assessee was not a manufacturer and did not employ more than 10 workers. This was confirmed by the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether contractual workers are to be included in the count of employees for Section 80IB(2)(iv) and whether the assessee was engaged in manufacturing activities.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 80IB(2)(iv)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)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.
- Nilgiri Ceylon Tea Supplying Co. v. State of Bombay15 citing10 STC 500 · 1959 · HC
- Sacs Eagles Chicory v. CIT14 citing123 Taxmann 221 · 2003 · SC
- CIT v. Madurai Pandian Engg. Corpn. Ltd.5 citing239 ITR 375 · 1999 · HC
- CIT v. Jyoti Plastic Works ( P3 citing16 Taxmann.com 172 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & HON’BLE SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :
The below mentioned two appeals have been filed by the appellant
assessee for AY-2006-07 to AY-2007-08 contesting the order of Ld. First
Appellate Authority indicated Column-E, herein below:-
S. Appeal AYs Appellant CIT(A) Order Details Respondent No. Nos
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.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026