CIT v. Jindal\nSteel & Power Ltd.

468 ITR 162Reported decision#20931 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10TA Section 10TD Section 10TG Section 80IA Section 92C Section 92CA Section 92CB

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(8)safe harbour rules section 92ba safe harbour section 92c(1)section 92f section 92c(3)benchmarking analysis specified domestic transaction tested party section 144c(3)section 92b

Judgments citing CIT v. Jindal\nSteel & Power Ltd.

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

ITA 2767/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

…he Registry to forward copies of this Order both to the Ministry of Finance and CBDT for consideration.” 15. 1. The argument advanced by the Ld.DR is that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., reported in 468 ITR 162 is very little to do with the controversy at hand, since it dealt with the interpretation of law prior to the introduction of Clause (ii) to Explanation to Section 80IA, therefore the principles of the judgment is no longer applicable. Be that as it may, if one goes through the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and also on deeper scrutiny, th…

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment

ITA 2366/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Jsw Energy Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years under consideration stands partly allowed and cross appeals filed by the assesse stands dismissed

ITA 2365/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(3)

…the Registry to forward copies of this Order both to the Ministry of Finance and CBDT for consideration.” 15.1. The argument advanced by the Ld.DR is that the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., reported in 468 ITR 162 is very little to do with the controversy at hand, since it dealt with the interpretation of law prior to the introduction of Clause (ii) to Explanation to Section 80IA, therefore the principles of the judgment is no longer applicable. Be that as it may, if one goes through the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and also on deeper scrutiny, th…

Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd (Since Amalgamated With Grasim Industries Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-1(4) Earlier With ACIT(Ltu) 1, Mumbai

In the result, theappeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly

ITA 563/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon’Bleunder Section 255(4) Of The Act. The Points Of Difference Were Thereafter Referred To The Hon’Blefor Resolution. The Hon’Blehas Now Rendered His Detailed Opinion & The Appeals Have Been Placed Before Us To Pass The Consequential

Section 255(4)Section 80

…ermined under Clause (1). iii. Whether, after the insertion of Clause (ii) to Explanation in Section BDIA(8) ... 01/04/2013, the principles and ratio of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd., reported in 468 ITR 162 is no longer applicable as it pertained to 'market value' as defined in earlier clause corresponding to clause (il and accordingly, the market value has to be determined in terms of arm's length principle provided from Section 92 to 92F iv. Whether, even under the SDT while determining the arm's length price, can the price at which State Electri…