CIT v. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. (230 CTR 206)

DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. NAVKAR CORPORATION LIMITED, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, we affirm the order of the Ld

ITA 1846/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 32Section 80Section 801ASection 801A(4)(i)Section 801A(5)Section 801A(8)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT-Central Circle- Vs. Navkar Corporation Limited 1(4) 205-206, J.K. Chambers, Mumbai Sector-17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai – 400 705 PAN/GIR No.AACCN8633K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vijay Mehta, CA & Shri Tarang Mehta Revenue by Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement 12/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue against order dated 24/12/2024 passed by ld. CIT…

M/S GIRIRAJ ENTERPRISES,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 427/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 10(35)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…ction 80IA, for computing the deduction u/s 80IA(2), the eligible business is to be treated as the only source of income. Sub- sec (5) of section 80IA has been explained by the Hon'ble High Court and Kerala in the case of CIT Vs. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. 230 CTR 206 (Ker) which has been followed by the Ld. CIT(A). The term "business used in sub-sec.(5) section 80IA in our humble opinion is confined to the independent undertaking and cannot get merged with the other businesses. In Sec. 80IA(2), for claiming deduction "undertaking" or "Enterprise" as such is to be considered. Sec. 80IA(2) is charging sections…

M/S. L.B. KUNJIR,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 418/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69ASection 69BSection 80I

…ction 80IA, for computing the deduction u/s 80IA(2), the eligible business is to be treated as the only source of income. Sub- sec.(5) of section 80IA has been explained by the Hon'ble High Court and Kerala in the case of CIT Vs. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. 230 CTR 206 (Ker) which has been followed by the Ld. CIT(A). The term "business" used in sub-sec. (5) section 80IA in our humble opinion is confined to the independent undertaking and cannot get merged with the other businesses. In Sec. 80IA(2), for claiming deduction "undertaking" or "Enterprise" as such is to be considered. Sec.80IA(2) is charging sections…

M/S. L.B. KUNJIR,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 417/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69ASection 69BSection 80I

…ction 80IA, for computing the deduction u/s 80IA(2), the eligible business is to be treated as the only source of income. Sub- sec.(5) of section 80IA has been explained by the Hon'ble High Court and Kerala in the case of CIT Vs. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. 230 CTR 206 (Ker) which has been followed by the Ld. CIT(A). The term "business" used in sub-sec. (5) section 80IA in our humble opinion is confined to the independent undertaking and cannot get merged with the other businesses. In Sec. 80IA(2), for claiming deduction "undertaking" or "Enterprise" as such is to be considered. Sec.80IA(2) is charging sections…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7, PUNE vs. LB KUNJIR, PUNE

In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 240/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69ASection 69BSection 80I

…ction 80IA, for computing the deduction u/s 80IA(2), the eligible business is to be treated as the only source of income. Sub- sec.(5) of section 80IA has been explained by the Hon'ble High Court and Kerala in the case of CIT Vs. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. 230 CTR 206 (Ker) which has been followed by the Ld. CIT(A). The term "business" used in sub-sec. (5) section 80IA in our humble opinion is confined to the independent undertaking and cannot get merged with the other businesses. In Sec. 80IA(2), for claiming deduction "undertaking" or "Enterprise" as such is to be considered. Sec.80IA(2) is charging sections…

DCIT, PUNE vs. L B KUNJIR, PUNE

In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1088/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69ASection 69BSection 80I

…ction 80IA, for computing the deduction u/s 80IA(2), the eligible business is to be treated as the only source of income. Sub- sec.(5) of section 80IA has been explained by the Hon'ble High Court and Kerala in the case of CIT Vs. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. 230 CTR 206 (Ker) which has been followed by the Ld. CIT(A). The term "business" used in sub-sec. (5) section 80IA in our humble opinion is confined to the independent undertaking and cannot get merged with the other businesses. In Sec. 80IA(2), for claiming deduction "undertaking" or "Enterprise" as such is to be considered. Sec.80IA(2) is charging sections…

DCIT CIRCLE 7, BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK vs. L B KUNJIR, PUNE

In the result, the two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the three appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1046/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 133ASection 69ASection 69BSection 80I

…ction 80IA, for computing the deduction u/s 80IA(2), the eligible business is to be treated as the only source of income. Sub- sec.(5) of section 80IA has been explained by the Hon'ble High Court and Kerala in the case of CIT Vs. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. 230 CTR 206 (Ker) which has been followed by the Ld. CIT(A). The term "business" used in sub-sec. (5) section 80IA in our humble opinion is confined to the independent undertaking and cannot get merged with the other businesses. In Sec. 80IA(2), for claiming deduction "undertaking" or "Enterprise" as such is to be considered. Sec.80IA(2) is charging sections…

M/S ANU CASHEWS,KOLLAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 700/COCH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2015-16 The Assistant M/S. Anu Cashews, Commissioner Of Parameswar Nagar, Income Tax, Kollam. Circle – 1, Pan: Aadfa7642K Vs. Kollam. Appellant Respondent : Shri G. Surendranath Rao, Assessee By Ca : Smt J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. Revenue By Ar Date Of Hearing : 14-09-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14-09-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 10/10/2019 Passed By Ld.Pcit, Thiruvananthapuram U/S. 263 Of The Act On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Is Against Law & Facts. 2. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Has Erred In Concluding That The Ao Had Completed The Assessment Without Verification & Application Of Mind. During The Original Assessment Proceedings The Ao Had Sought All Information On The Deduction Claimed Under Chapter Via. He Had Issued A Notice U/S 142(1) Dated 23.05.2017, In Which Inter Alia He Had Called For Reconciliation Of The Large Deduction Claimed U/S 80(Ia) With The Books Of Account

For Respondent: Shri G. Surendranath Rao

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80Section 80I

…. CIT-V 45 reported in 392 ITR 426 (Del HC)  CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported in 256 ITR 1 (Del HC) 6. Assessee has also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in case of CIT vs. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. reported in [2010] 230 CTR 206 (Kerala) wherein the Hon’ble Court has held that the assessee cannot claim deduction u/s. 80IA in excess of the gross total income computed no matter the eligible amounts may be higher than such income. Hon’ble High Court in case of CIT vs. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. (supra) has held that: The procedure to be followed for the purpose of granti…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. DAMODAR JAGANATH MALPANI,, SANGAMNER

In the result the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1374/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Mrs. Nanditha Kanchan

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…ection 80IA, for computing the deduction u/s 80IA(2), the eligible business is to be treated as the only source of income. Sub-sec.(s) of section 80IA has been explained by the Hon'ble High Court and Kerala in the case of CIT Vs. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. 230 CTR 206 (Ker) which has been followed by the Ld. ,CIT(A). The term "business" used in sub-sec(s) section 80IA in our humble opinion is confined to the independent undertaking and cannot get merged with the other businesses. In Sec. 80IA(2), for claiming deduction "undertaking" or. "Enterprise" as such is to be considered. Sec.80IA(2) is charging sections…

CIT v. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd.

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd.

DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. NAVKAR CORPORATION LIMITED, NAVI MUMBAI

M/S GIRIRAJ ENTERPRISES,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

M/S. L.B. KUNJIR,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, PUNE, PUNE

M/S. L.B. KUNJIR,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, PUNE, PUNE

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7, PUNE vs. LB KUNJIR, PUNE

DCIT, PUNE vs. L B KUNJIR, PUNE

DCIT CIRCLE 7, BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK vs. L B KUNJIR, PUNE

M/S ANU CASHEWS,KOLLAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLLAM

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. DAMODAR JAGANATH MALPANI,, SANGAMNER