ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TIRUNELVELI vs. LOYAL TEXTILE MILLS LTD, KOVILPATTI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance on commission payments and partly deleted the disallowance on professional fees. For the Section 80IA deduction, the CIT(A) upheld the assessee's position, relying on Supreme Court decisions regarding the valuation of captive power consumption. Regarding disallowance for commission paid to domestic agents, the CIT(A) directed the AO to verify and allow deductions where TDS was actually deducted.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2020-21 declaring NIL income. The Assessing Officer (AO), after considering the Transfer Pricing Officer's report, made significant additions, including disallowances related to Section 80IA deduction, domestic commission, and professional fees. The assessee appealed these additions to the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether the deletion of transfer pricing adjustment for captive power valuation under Section 80IA and the deletion of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for domestic commission were justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(3),Section 144C(3),Section 144B,Section 92CA,Section 80IA,Section 40(a)(ia),Section 40(a)(i),Section 92F,Section 10B,Section 46A(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)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.
- CIT v. Faizan Shoes (P.) Ltd.139 citing48 Taxmann.com 48 · 2014 · HC
- CIT v. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd.58 citing157 Taxmann.com 207 · 2023 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA
PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM:
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 16, Chennai [in short, “ld.CIT(A)”] dated 26.06.2025, relating to the assessment years 2020-21 against the order of the Assessing Officer passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act dated 30.09.2023. :-2-: ITA No: 2308/Chny/2025
Facts in brief emanating from the records are that the a
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 144C(3)
- Radhakishan Potharajula, Karim Nagar vs ITO (Int Taxn)-2, HyderabadITA 2340/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Neha Hiranand Motwani, Nashik vs ITO International Tax, NashikITA 1570/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- 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
- Atc Tires Private Limited, Mumbai vs The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 6468/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetanj Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Namita Behera vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Ratul Boro vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026