Liberty India v. CIT

317 ITR 218Supreme Court of India2009#109 most cited

What is Liberty India v. CIT authority for?

The Supreme Court clarified that for profits and gains to be eligible for deductions under sections like 10B, 80IA, or 80IB, the income must be "derived from" or have a direct nexus to the eligible business activity. Income from incidental sources like the sale of scrips/licenses or interest on employee loans is generally not considered as derived from the eligible business for such deductions.

571

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Liberty India v. CIT · 317 ITR 218 · section 10B · section 80IA · section 80IB · profits derived from · direct nexus · eligible business · export undertaking deduction · sale of scrips income · interest income deduction

Also reported as

183 Taxmann 349

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 10BSection 80IBSection 147Section 80IASection 1961Section 250
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 75section 80hsection 80hhsection 80hhcsection 80icsection 80ibeligible businessdeduction under section 80iasection 80isection 80iadisallowance u/s 14agross total income

Judgments citing Liberty India v. CIT

ACIT- 8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Rallis India Limited, Mumbai

06/Mum/2026

ITA 7855/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.AR
Section 14A

…essee’s case cost is Nil. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Liberty 19 ITA Nos.7852 to 7855/Mum/2025 & CO Nos.06 to 09/Mum/2026 (A.Ys. 2013-14, 14-15, 16-17 & 17-18) Raillis India Ltd. India v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC), the A.O. observed that since deduction u/s. 80IA is a profit linked incentive, it cannot be computed on notional basis. Thus, ultimately, he rejected assessee’s claim of deduction. 44. The assessee contested the disallowance before ld. First appellate authority. 45. Ld. First appellate authority having found that identical issue was decid…

ACIT- 8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Rallis India Limited, Mumbai

06/Mum/2026

ITA 7854/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.AR
Section 14A

…essee’s case cost is Nil. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Liberty 19 ITA Nos.7852 to 7855/Mum/2025 & CO Nos.06 to 09/Mum/2026 (A.Ys. 2013-14, 14-15, 16-17 & 17-18) Raillis India Ltd. India v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC), the A.O. observed that since deduction u/s. 80IA is a profit linked incentive, it cannot be computed on notional basis. Thus, ultimately, he rejected assessee’s claim of deduction. 44. The assessee contested the disallowance before ld. First appellate authority. 45. Ld. First appellate authority having found that identical issue was decid…

ACIT- 8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Rallis India Limited, Mumbai

06/Mum/2026

ITA 7853/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.AR
Section 14A

…essee’s case cost is Nil. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Liberty 19 ITA Nos.7852 to 7855/Mum/2025 & CO Nos.06 to 09/Mum/2026 (A.Ys. 2013-14, 14-15, 16-17 & 17-18) Raillis India Ltd. India v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC), the A.O. observed that since deduction u/s. 80IA is a profit linked incentive, it cannot be computed on notional basis. Thus, ultimately, he rejected assessee’s claim of deduction. 44. The assessee contested the disallowance before ld. First appellate authority. 45. Ld. First appellate authority having found that identical issue was decid…

ACIT- 8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Rallis India Limited, Mumbai

06/Mum/2026

ITA 7852/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.AR
Section 14A

…essee’s case cost is Nil. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Liberty 19 ITA Nos.7852 to 7855/Mum/2025 & CO Nos.06 to 09/Mum/2026 (A.Ys. 2013-14, 14-15, 16-17 & 17-18) Raillis India Ltd. India v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC), the A.O. observed that since deduction u/s. 80IA is a profit linked incentive, it cannot be computed on notional basis. Thus, ultimately, he rejected assessee’s claim of deduction. 44. The assessee contested the disallowance before ld. First appellate authority. 45. Ld. First appellate authority having found that identical issue was decid…

DCIT, Circle-3(4), Mumbai vs. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

ITA 3991/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 35Section 41(1)Section 801C

…receipts not liable to tax under the normal provisions of the Act and also liable for exclusion while computing book profit under section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 contrary to the binding precedent of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Liberty India v. CIT (317 ITR 218)" (Tax Effect (20): Rs. 59,72,866) 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the adjustment of deleting the addition of Rs. 6.17.842/- to the income of the assessee company made by the Transfer Pricing Officer on account of export of pharmaceutical products to Glenmark South Africa? 2. Whet…

DCIT, Circle-3(4), Mumbai vs. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

ITA 3971/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 35Section 41(1)Section 801C

…receipts not liable to tax under the normal provisions of the Act and also liable for exclusion while computing book profit under section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 contrary to the binding precedent of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Liberty India v. CIT (317 ITR 218)" (Tax Effect (20): Rs. 59,72,866) 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the adjustment of deleting the addition of Rs. 6.17.842/- to the income of the assessee company made by the Transfer Pricing Officer on account of export of pharmaceutical products to Glenmark South Africa? 2. Whet…

Narayan Industries vs. ACIT Circle 60(1) New Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA/489/2022HC Delhi12 Feb 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

Section 80

…d hereinabove also Mr. Rohit Jain, learned counsel for the appellant has fairly conceded that the first question stands decided by Hon’ble the Supreme Court against the assessee in the case of Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC) and Commissioner of Income-tax v. Sterling Foods reported in [1999] 237 ITR 579 (SC). 5. He however submitted that even if the aforesaid question is decided against the appellant and it is held that the duty drawback has no nexus and co-relation with the industrial undertaking, the appellant-assessee alternatively contends the excise…

Aamir Khatri, Mumbai vs. DCIT-17(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal ITA No

ITA 3586/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263

…1 Aamir Khatri INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No. 3586/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Aamir Khatri vs DCIT – 17(1), Mumbai 183, 2nd Floor, Ashoka Shopping Centre, (erstwhile ACIT-2(1), Lokmnya Tilak Road, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai), Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai-400 PAN : AGKPK1753E 051 APPELLANT RESPONDENT Present for Assessee Shri Suchek Anchaliaya Present for Revenue Shri Surendra Mohan (SR DR.) Date of hearing 04/12/2025 Date if pronouncement 19/12/2025 O R D E R Per : Shri Anikesh Banerje…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S American Express (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, cross appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4295/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.4295/िद"ी/2009(िन.व. 2003-04) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), R. No. 390, Central Revenue Building, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi 110002 बनाम Vs. American Express (India) P. Ltd., First Floor, Mercantile House, 15, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi 110001 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaaca-8163-F आअसं.4240/िद"ी/2009(िन.व. 2003-04) American Express (India) P. Ltd., First Floor, Mercantile House, 15, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi 110001 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaaca-8163-F बनाम Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Central Revenue Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Nishank Vashitath, Advocate "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Monika Singh, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 17/11/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 26/11/2025

For Appellant: Shri Nishank Vashitath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 10BSection 80H

…of the Act should have direct nexus to the export business activity of the undertaking. The ld. DR in support of her submissions placed reliance on the decisions rendered in the case of CIT vs. Sterling Foods, 237 ITR 579 (SC) and Liberty India Ltd. vs. CIT, 317 ITR 218 (SC). 5. Shri Nishank Vashitath, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that during the period relevant to assessment year under appeal, the assessee had received an interest of Rs.1,27,741/- on the loans given to employees. The assessee has netted of said interest income against the interest expenditure. He further submitted that the loan…

American Express (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, cross appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4240/DEL/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.4295/िद"ी/2009(िन.व. 2003-04) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), R. No. 390, Central Revenue Building, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi 110002 बनाम Vs. American Express (India) P. Ltd., First Floor, Mercantile House, 15, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi 110001 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaaca-8163-F आअसं.4240/िद"ी/2009(िन.व. 2003-04) American Express (India) P. Ltd., First Floor, Mercantile House, 15, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi 110001 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaaca-8163-F बनाम Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Central Revenue Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Nishank Vashitath, Advocate "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Monika Singh, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 17/11/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 26/11/2025

For Appellant: Shri Nishank Vashitath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 10BSection 80H

…of the Act should have direct nexus to the export business activity of the undertaking. The ld. DR in support of her submissions placed reliance on the decisions rendered in the case of CIT vs. Sterling Foods, 237 ITR 579 (SC) and Liberty India Ltd. vs. CIT, 317 ITR 218 (SC). 5. Shri Nishank Vashitath, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that during the period relevant to assessment year under appeal, the assessee had received an interest of Rs.1,27,741/- on the loans given to employees. The assessee has netted of said interest income against the interest expenditure. He further submitted that the loan…

Radiant Textiles Private Limited, Patiala vs. ACIT, Circle, Patiala

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA 444/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.444/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Radiant Textiles Pvt. Ltd. Acit Circle Patiala बनाम/ Village Chounth, Patiala Road Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Samana-147101 Patiala 147001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcr-1175-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 13-02-2025 In The Matter Of A Rectification Order Passed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 154 Of The Act On 28-11-2023. The Only Grievance Of The Assessee Is Application Of Correct Rates Of Taxes.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 145ASection 154

…xpenditure and as such, any refund / reimbursement thereof at a later stage is nothing but a credit to assessee’s Profit & Loss Account. The same, by its very nature, has the character of business receipts and nothing more. The decision of Liberty India Ltd. (317 ITR 218) as referred to by Ld. AR is in the context of deduction u/s 80-IA / 80-IB wherein the expression “derived from” was the primary issue that fell for consideration of Hon’ble Apex Court. The Hon’ble Court held that “derived from” require direct / first degree nexus between the profits and the business activity of the industrial undertaking. Howeve…

The Acti, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Nirma Limited, Ahmedabad

ITA 1437/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1412 & 1413/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: (2015-2016 & 2016-17) Nirma Limited, Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacn5350K आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1436-1437/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : (2015-16 & 2016-17) The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. Nirma Limited, बनाम / V/S. Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) स्थायी लेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacn5350K & C.O Nos.11-12/Ahd/2020 In आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1436-1437/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : (2015-16 & 2016-17) Nirma Limited, Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) The Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ V/S. Income Tax/The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. स्थायी लेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacn5350K अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, withFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…tion under section 80IA was to be held allowable at any appellate stage, then such deduction had to be restricted after - (i) excluding other income not derived from the eligible business as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Liberty India Ltd. v. CIT (317 ITR 218), (ii) setting off the brought forward losses of the eligible undertaking before computing the current year's profits, and (iii) allocating the administrative and financial costs to the eligible unit on a reasonable basis. 38. We find that the learned CIT(A) while allowing the claim in principle, has not dealt with these consequential aspects. In…

The Acti, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Nirma Limited, Ahmedabad

ITA 1436/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1412 & 1413/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: (2015-2016 & 2016-17) Nirma Limited, Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacn5350K आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1436-1437/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : (2015-16 & 2016-17) The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. Nirma Limited, बनाम / V/S. Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) स्थायी लेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacn5350K & C.O Nos.11-12/Ahd/2020 In आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1436-1437/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : (2015-16 & 2016-17) Nirma Limited, Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) The Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ V/S. Income Tax/The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. स्थायी लेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacn5350K अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, withFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…tion under Section 80IA was to be held allowable at any appellate stage, then such deduction had to be restricted after - (i) excluding other income not derived from the eligible business as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Liberty India Ltd. v. CIT (317 ITR 218), (ii) setting off the brought forward losses of the eligible undertaking before computing the current year's profits, and 23 ITA Nos.1412-1413/Ahd/2019 with others Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT Assessment Years (2015-16 & 2016-17) 23 (iii) allocating the administrative and financial costs to the eligible unit on a reasonable basis. 38. We find that th…

Nirma Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dcti, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1413/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1412 & 1413/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: (2015-2016 & 2016-17) Nirma Limited, Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacn5350K आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1436-1437/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : (2015-16 & 2016-17) The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. Nirma Limited, बनाम / V/S. Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) स्थायी लेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacn5350K & C.O Nos.11-12/Ahd/2020 In आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1436-1437/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : (2015-16 & 2016-17) Nirma Limited, Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) The Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ V/S. Income Tax/The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. स्थायी लेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacn5350K अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, withFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…tion under section 80IA was to be held allowable at any appellate stage, then such deduction had to be restricted after - (i) excluding other income not derived from the eligible business as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Liberty India Ltd. v. CIT (317 ITR 218), (ii) setting off the brought forward losses of the eligible undertaking before computing the current year's profits, and ITA Nos.1412-1413/Ahd/2019 with others Nirma Limited Vs. DCIT Assessment Years (2015-16 & 2016-17) 23 (iii) allocating the administrative and financial costs to the eligible unit on a reasonable basis. 38. We find that the l…

Nirma Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dcti, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1412/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1412 & 1413/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: (2015-2016 & 2016-17) Nirma Limited, Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) The Deputy Commissioner बनाम / Of Income Tax, V/S. Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacn5350K आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1436-1437/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : (2015-16 & 2016-17) The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. Nirma Limited, बनाम / Nirma House, V/S. Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) स्थायी लेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacn5350K & C.O Nos.11-12/Ahd/2020 In आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1436-1437/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : (2015-16 & 2016-17) Nirma Limited, Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009. (Gujarat) The Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ V/S. Income Tax/The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad. स्थायी लेखा सं./ Pan: Aaacn5350K अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, withFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 80I

…tion under section 80IA was to be held allowable at any appellate stage, then such deduction had to be restricted after - (i) excluding other income not derived from the eligible business as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Liberty India Ltd. v. CIT (317 ITR 218), (ii) setting off the brought forward losses of the eligible undertaking before computing the current year's profits, and (iii) allocating the administrative and financial costs to the eligible unit on a reasonable basis. 38. We find that the learned CIT(A) while allowing the claim in principle, has not dealt with these consequential aspects. In…

Paresh Dayashankar Madeka, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(3), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 343/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot03 Jul 2025AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri R. D. Lalchandani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…even if the amounts have been received from bogus share holders then it was for the income tax officer to proceed by reopening the assessment of such share holders and that the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 317 ITR 218 is a good law with respect to pre proviso section 68. Copy of the order is also enclosed for your Honours reference 18. It has been notices from the ledger account of copy of M/s. BCCL in the books of account of the appellant. The appellant has given the inter- corporate loans to M/s. BCCL and subsequently those loans were repaid by m/s. BCCL to…

ITO, Ludhiana vs. M/S A.K. Exports, Ludhiana

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 800/CHANDI/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.799/CHANDI/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.965/CHANDI/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.375/CHANDI/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.800/CHANDI/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) ITO M/s A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAG…

ITO, Ludhiana vs. M/S A.K. Exports, Ludhiana

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 799/CHANDI/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.799/CHANDI/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.965/CHANDI/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.375/CHANDI/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.800/CHANDI/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) ITO M/s A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAG…

M/S A.K. Exports, Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ludhiana

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 988/CHANDI/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.799/CHANDI/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.965/CHANDI/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.375/CHANDI/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.800/CHANDI/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) ITO M/s A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAG…

ITO -I(1), Ludhiana vs. M/S A.K. Exports, Ludhiana

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 965/CHANDI/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.799/CHANDI/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.965/CHANDI/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.375/CHANDI/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.800/CHANDI/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) ITO M/s A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAG…