CIT v. Reliance Energy Limited

127 Taxmann.com 69Supreme Court of India2021#2473 most cited

What is CIT v. Reliance Energy Limited authority for?

Deduction under Section 80-IA or 80-IB is computed by setting it off against the gross total income to arrive at the total income of an assessee.

47

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v Reliance Energy Limited · 358 ITR 371 · 127 Taxmann.com 69 · Section 80IA deduction · Section 80IB deduction · gross total income · total income computation · eligible business deduction

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Reliance Energy Limited

VITP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE8(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 573/HYD/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.573 & 574/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Vitp Private Limited Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 8 (1) Pan:Aaccv2672G Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Advocates Percy Perdiwala & Mahima Goud राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: Shri Shahnawaz-Ul-Rahman, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 08/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Two Appeals Are Filed By Vitp Private Limited (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Hyderabad, (“Ld.Pcit”), Dated 30/03/2024 For The A.Y.2017-18. As Both The Appeals Are Interrelated & Belongs To The Same, Both Are Heard Together & One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Advocates Percy Perdiwala andFor Respondent: : Shri Shahnawaz-ul-Rahman
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)Section 263Section 80Section 801A

…ITA Nos 573 and 5754 of 2024 VIP Private Limited आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘DB-B‘Bench, Hyderabad श्री रविश सूद, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री मधुसूदन सावड़िया लेखा सदस्य समक्ष | Before Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member AND Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं / ITA Nos.573 & 574/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18) VITP Private Limited Vs. Dy. CIT Hyderabad Circle 8 (1) PAN:AACCV2672G Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee by: Advocates Percy Perdiwala and Mahima Goud राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue by:: Shri Shahnawaz-ul…

ACIT, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S GLAXOSMITHKLINE CONSUMER HEALTHCARE LTD., GURGAON

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1355/CHANDI/2018[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Aug 2025AY 1997-98

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1355/Chandi/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1997-98) Dcit-1(1)(1) M/S Hindustan Unilever Ltd. R.N.579A, 5Th Floor (Legal Successor Of M/S Glaxosmithkline बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Consumer Healthcare Ltd.) Vs. Mumbai – 400020 Unilever House, B.D. Swant Marg, Chakala Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 099 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaach-1004-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Rohit Jain (Advocate) & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Rohit Sharma (Cit) A/W Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27-06-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 1997-98 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chandigarh Dated 02-08-2018 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act On 31-03-2017. The Revenue Has Filed Revised Form No.36 On 10-09-2024 Which Is On Record. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: -

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain (Advocate) and Ms. SomyaFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma (CIT) a/w Sh. Vivek
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234DSection 43B

…not the case here. It could clearly be seen that the regular assessment stood framed before 01-06-2003 and therefore, impugned interest u/s 234D could not be charged from the assessee. 6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Energy Ltd. (358 ITR 371) held that where the assessment was completed prior to 01-06-2003, provisions of section 234D could not be applied. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sundaram Finance Ltd. (417 ITR 679), on similar facts, held that when the order u/s 143(3) was passed before 01-06-2003, the order passed by AO u/s 7 Assessment Year: 1997-98 154r.w.s. 25…

DIGVIJAI POLYTEX PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJAPALAYAM vs. ACIT CORP CIRCLE, MADURAI

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

ITA 343/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.343/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Digvijai Polytex Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 61, Kumarasamy Raja Nagar, Income Tax, Rajapalayam 626 108. Corporate Circle, Madurai. [Pan: Aaacd 9673K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. J. Prabhakar & Shri. S. Muralidhar, Chartered Accountants. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20.06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. J. Prabhakar, & Shri. S. MuralidharFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Srinivasan, IRS, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 28Section 80Section 801Section 801ASection 80A(4)Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ (SMC) BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.343/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Digvijai Polytex Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of 61, Kumarasamy Raja Nagar, Income Tax, Rajapalayam 626 108. Corporate Circle, Madurai. [PAN: AAACD 9673K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. J. Prabhakar, & Shri. S…

Showing 120 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

CIT v. Reliance Energy Limited (127 Taxmann.com 69) — Cited in 47 Judgments | BharatTax