AGARWAL ENTERPRISES,PUNE vs. A.O, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal determined that the total salary expense of Rs.41,27,199/- claimed by the assessee was correct and allowable. It directed the Assessing Officer to re-compute the deduction under Section 80IA by apportioning the salary expenses between the power generation unit and the share trading business based on their respective turnovers, considering this a scientific method.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Agarwal Enterprises, engaged in electricity generation and share trading, claimed a deduction of Rs.1,13,93,754/- under Section 80IA for AY 2023-24. The case was scrutinized to verify this first-year deduction, where the Assessing Officer (AO) initially accepted Rs.27,06,871/- out of Rs.41,27,199/- claimed salary expenses and allocated 50% to each business. The CIT(A) later allowed Rs.38,64,803/- of salary and allocated 1/4th to power generation and 3/4th to share trading.
What were the issues?
The key issues were the disallowance of a portion of salary expenses claimed by the assessee and the appropriate method for allocating common salary expenses between the eligible business (power generation) and other business (share trading) for Section 80IA deduction calculation.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 80IA,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 37(1),Section 43B(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA
PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.06.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2023-24. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a firm carrying on the business of electricity generation via windmill and solar plant. It filed its return of income on 30.09.2023 declaring total income of Rs.8,08,16,101/- after claiming Chapter VIA deduction of Rs.1,13,93,754/- u/s 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS to verify the following reason: “First Year of Deduction claimed u/s 80IA/80IAB/80IAC/80IBA”
2
Accordingly statuto
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 80IA
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 964/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur… vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 963/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 964/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur… vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 963/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Klsr Infratech Limited, Hyderabad vs DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), HyderabadITA 2323/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026