← All Phrases

“deduction under section 80IA”

DeductionsSection 80IASection 80IA554 judgments

The decision most relied on for deduction under section 80IA is Liberty India v. CIT (317 ITR 218), cited in 571 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on deduction under section 80IA

Liberty India v. CIT
317 ITR 218 · 2009 · Supreme Court
571
citing judgments

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.

Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT
262 ITR 278 · 2003 · Supreme Court
353
citing judgments

Income eligible for deduction under Section 80IA or 80IC must have a direct nexus with the eligible business activity of the industrial undertaking. Income merely incidental to the business, even if part of the assessee's overall business, is not considered "derived from" the eligible undertaking.

M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT
436 ITR 582 · 2021 · Supreme Court
308
citing judgments

Amendments to tax law that impose new obligations or change existing legal positions apply prospectively, even if stated to be "for the removal of doubts." The judgment also clarifies that deductions under Section 43B are allowed only on actual payment, overriding the mercantile system of accounting.

Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT
196 ITR 188 · 1992 · Supreme Court
289
citing judgments

Provisions in taxing statutes that grant incentives, concessions, or exemptions for promoting economic growth and industrialization must be interpreted liberally and purposively. Any restrictions placed on such provisions should also be construed reasonably to advance their objective, not frustrate it.

CIT v. ABG Heavy Industries Ltd.
322 ITR 323 · 2010 · High Court
229
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot deny a Section 80IA deduction by merely asserting that the assessee is not a "developer" without considering the relevant agreements and facts. Entitlement to Section 80IA deduction requires a thorough examination of the assessee's role as a developer.

CIT v. Paul Brothers
216 ITR 548 · 1995 · High Court
164
citing judgments

Once a claim for deduction under section 80-IA or 80-IB is allowed in the initial assessment year and is not subsequently withdrawn, the revenue is estopped from denying the deduction for subsequent years on the same grounds.

CIT v. Contimeters Electricals (P.) Ltd.
317 ITR 249 · 2009 · High Court
140
citing judgments

The requirement to file an audit report along with the return of income under section 80-IA(7) and similar provisions is directory, not mandatory. Such a report suffices if filed at any time before the assessment is framed.

CIT v. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd.
243 ITR 2 · 2000 · Supreme Court
125
citing judgments

Income earned from deposits or investments directly and inextricably linked to the acquisition of assets or the setting up of a business project during its construction period is incidental to the asset acquisition, reducing the project cost, or constitutes business receipts eligible for relevant deductions, rather than 'income from other sources'.

Judgments citing deduction under section 80IA

Tpl- Sucg Consortium, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Circle 6(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 753/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Malay Kalavadia, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 80I

rival submissions and perused the material available on record. For the purpose of considering whether the retention money is allowable while computing deduction under Section 80IA or not, the LD.CIT(A) relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Cambay Electrical Supply Industrial Co., Limited ... LD.CIT(A) had also distinguished the case for AY 2017- 18 and has held that there was no finding about the allowability of deduction under Section 80IA of the Act on the retention money. We have gone through the order of the assessment for AY 2017-18 which was available

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2) Now Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 524/AHD/2023[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

submissions and pertinent judgments observed that the matter revolved around whether lease rent income from products manufactured by the applicant qualified for deductions under section 80IA of the Act. Ld. CIT(Appeals) held that the direct connection between the lease rent income and the assessee's business activities was affirmed ... Therefore, while the lease rent was deemed business income and eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Ld. CIT(Appeals) was of the view that lease rent could not be simultaneously counted in the computation of deduction under section 80HHC of the Act due to provisions in section

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2) Now Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 523/AHD/2023[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

submissions and pertinent judgments observed that the matter revolved around whether lease rent income from products manufactured by the applicant qualified for deductions under section 80IA of the Act. Ld. CIT(Appeals) held that the direct connection between the lease rent income and the assessee's business activities was affirmed ... Therefore, while the lease rent was deemed business income and eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Ld. CIT(Appeals) was of the view that lease rent could not be simultaneously counted in the computation of deduction under section 80HHC of the Act due to provisions in section

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2) Now Circle- 1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 522/AHD/2023[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

submissions and pertinent judgments observed that the matter revolved around whether lease rent income from products manufactured by the applicant qualified for deductions under section 80IA of the Act. Ld. CIT(Appeals) held that the direct connection between the lease rent income and the assessee's business activities was affirmed ... Therefore, while the lease rent was deemed business income and eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Ld. CIT(Appeals) was of the view that lease rent could not be simultaneously counted in the computation of deduction under section 80HHC of the Act due to provisions in section

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The DCIT, Circle-1 Now Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 521/AHD/2023[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2000-01

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

submissions and pertinent judgments observed that the matter revolved around whether lease rent income from products manufactured by the applicant qualified for deductions under section 80IA of the Act. Ld. CIT(Appeals) held that the direct connection between the lease rent income and the assessee's business activities was affirmed ... Therefore, while the lease rent was deemed business income and eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Ld. CIT(Appeals) was of the view that lease rent could not be simultaneously counted in the computation of deduction under section 80HHC of the Act due to provisions in section

Jmc-Mske(Jv), Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 830/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Us & That These Four

For Appellant: S/Sh. D.M. Rindani and Sh. Chintan Shah, RRsFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

Appeal) as well as the Tribunal that the assessee has undertaken the development of infrastructure facility and is eligible to claim the deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act. 3.11. Section 80IA of the Act provides for deduction from the gross total income of the assessee which includes

Jmc-Mske(Jv), Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 829/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Us & That These Four

For Appellant: S/Sh. D.M. Rindani and Sh. Chintan Shah, RRsFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

Appeal) as well as the Tribunal that the assessee has undertaken the development of infrastructure facility and is eligible to claim the deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act. 3.11. Section 80IA of the Act provides for deduction from the gross total income of the assessee which includes

Bgsctpl- Mskel (Jv), Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 828/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Us & That These Four

For Appellant: S/Sh. D.M. Rindani and Sh. Chintan Shah, RRsFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

Appeal) as well as the Tribunal that the assessee has undertaken the development of infrastructure facility and is eligible to claim the deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act. 3.11. Section 80IA of the Act provides for deduction from the gross total income of the assessee which includes

Bgsctpl- Mskel Consortium, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 2498/AHD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Us & That These Four

For Appellant: S/Sh. D.M. Rindani and Sh. Chintan Shah, RRsFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

Appeal) as well as the Tribunal that the assessee has undertaken the development of infrastructure facility and is eligible to claim the deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act. 3.11. Section 80IA of the Act provides for deduction from the gross total income of the assessee which includes

Ramalingam Manonmani, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncw-15(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2124/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2124/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Ramalingam Manonmani, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5C/1, Bharathi Nagar, 1St Street, Non Corporate Ward 15(1), Wanaparthy Block (New Block), 2Nd Varatharajapuram, Coimbatore 641 015. Floor, 121 M.G. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Bazpm1359Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Narayanan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.06.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Raised 8 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Consideration Is Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Justified In Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer Exparte Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Narayanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 69ASection 80I

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस.एस. िव"ने

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(1)(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure Private Limited, Ahmedabad

ITA 1467/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1466/Ahd/2024 & 1467/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively The Acit Rajkamal Builders बनाम/ Circle-3(1)(1) Infrastrucutre Pvt.Ltd. V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 54, Park Hill Nr.Heaven Park Ramdevnagar, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) – 380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabcr 0326 A अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ritesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: /10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 80I

dated 17/06/2024, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 and AY 2018-19, wherein the CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s claim for deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”]. The Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred ... assessee filed its return of income for both the assessment years under consideration. In the return(s), the assessee claimed a deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act, relating to profits from infrastructure development projects, including road construction and irrigation works. In both the assessment years the AO disallowed

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(1)(1) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure Private Limited, Ahmedabad

ITA 1466/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1466/Ahd/2024 & 1467/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively The Acit Rajkamal Builders बनाम/ Circle-3(1)(1) Infrastrucutre Pvt.Ltd. V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 54, Park Hill Nr.Heaven Park Ramdevnagar, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) – 380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabcr 0326 A अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ritesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: /10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 80I

dated 17/06/2024, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 and AY 2018-19, wherein the CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s claim for deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”]. The Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred ... assessee filed its return of income for both the assessment years under consideration. In the return(s), the assessee claimed a deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act, relating to profits from infrastructure development projects, including road construction and irrigation works. In both the assessment years the AO disallowed

Sri Luxmi Tulasi Agro Papers Pvt Ltd, Rajahmundry vs. Assistnt Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Rajahmundry

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

ITA 196/VIZ/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.195 & 196/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2012-13)) Sri Luxmi Tulasi Agro Papers (P.) Ltd., V. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Rajahmundry Range D.No. 25-2-20, Jayakrishnapuram Aayakar Bhavan Annexe Rajamundry – 533105 Veerabhadrapuram Andhra Pradesh Kambala Cheruvu Rajamahendravaram [Pan: Aaecs2798A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(7)Section 80I

heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. The case of the Assessing Officer is that the assessee has claimed deduction under section 80IA of the Act with respect to the steam cost supplied to the paper unit by considering it as income in the books ... account of the assessee, thereby enhancing the profit of the power plant which is eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act and claiming the same as cost in the hands of the Paper unit. However, the only contention of the Ld.AR is with respect to the valuation

Sri Luxmi Tulasi Agro Papers Pvt Ltd, Rajahmundry vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajahmundry Range, Rajahmundry

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

ITA 195/VIZ/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.195 & 196/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2012-13)) Sri Luxmi Tulasi Agro Papers (P.) Ltd., V. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Rajahmundry Range D.No. 25-2-20, Jayakrishnapuram Aayakar Bhavan Annexe Rajamundry – 533105 Veerabhadrapuram Andhra Pradesh Kambala Cheruvu Rajamahendravaram [Pan: Aaecs2798A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(7)Section 80I

heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. The case of the Assessing Officer is that the assessee has claimed deduction under section 80IA of the Act with respect to the steam cost supplied to the paper unit by considering it as income in the books ... account of the assessee, thereby enhancing the profit of the power plant which is eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act and claiming the same as cost in the hands of the Paper unit. However, the only contention of the Ld.AR is with respect to the valuation

M/S Giriraj Enterprises, Pune vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1(1), 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

25/PUN/2024 unit and the same is to be treated as the only source of income for assessee for the purpose of computing deduction under section 80IA of the Act. The deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80-1A of the Act, thus, is in accordance with the said ... also carefully considered provisions of section 80IA and case laws relied upon by both parties. The facts with regard to eligibility for claiming deduction under section 80IA has not been disputed by the lower authorities. The lower authorities had admitted that the assessee is eligible for claiming deduction under section

Vardhman Textiles Limited, Ludhiana vs. ACIT-Circle-1, Ludhiana

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 61/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80I

Forex Gains, under section 80IA and 80IC of the Act. 11.1 The AO held that this item were not derived from industrial undertaking. Deduction under section 80IA and 80IC was, therefore, disallowed. The Ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, allowed the deduction claimed on all these items ... which is presently before us for adjudication. 11.3 The issue is as to whether is interest from customers and suppliers is eligible for deduction under section 80IA and 80IC of the Act. The AO disallowed the deduction, whereas the Ld. CIT(A) allowed it. 11.4 In Phatela Cotgin Industries (supra

ACIT, Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Textiles Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 117/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80I

Forex Gains, under section 80IA and 80IC of the Act. 11.1 The AO held that this item were not derived from industrial undertaking. Deduction under section 80IA and 80IC was, therefore, disallowed. The Ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, allowed the deduction claimed on all these items ... which is presently before us for adjudication. 11.3 The issue is as to whether is interest from customers and suppliers is eligible for deduction under section 80IA and 80IC of the Act. The AO disallowed the deduction, whereas the Ld. CIT(A) allowed it. 11.4 In Phatela Cotgin Industries (supra

M/S Vardhman Textiles Limited, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C-1, Ludhiana

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 486/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80I

Forex Gains, under section 80IA and 80IC of the Act. 11.1 The AO held that this item were not derived from industrial undertaking. Deduction under section 80IA and 80IC was, therefore, disallowed. The Ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, allowed the deduction claimed on all these items ... which is presently before us for adjudication. 11.3 The issue is as to whether is interest from customers and suppliers is eligible for deduction under section 80IA and 80IC of the Act. The AO disallowed the deduction, whereas the Ld. CIT(A) allowed it. 11.4 In Phatela Cotgin Industries (supra

DCIT, C-1, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Textiles Limited, Ludhiana

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 260/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80I

Forex Gains, under section 80IA and 80IC of the Act. 11.1 The AO held that this item were not derived from industrial undertaking. Deduction under section 80IA and 80IC was, therefore, disallowed. The Ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, allowed the deduction claimed on all these items ... which is presently before us for adjudication. 11.3 The issue is as to whether is interest from customers and suppliers is eligible for deduction under section 80IA and 80IC of the Act. The AO disallowed the deduction, whereas the Ld. CIT(A) allowed it. 11.4 In Phatela Cotgin Industries (supra

M/S Vardhman Textiles Limited, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, C-1, Ludhiana

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 187/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80I

Forex Gains, under section 80IA and 80IC of the Act. 11.1 The AO held that this item were not derived from industrial undertaking. Deduction under section 80IA and 80IC was, therefore, disallowed. The Ld. CIT(A), on the other hand, allowed the deduction claimed on all these items ... which is presently before us for adjudication. 11.3 The issue is as to whether is interest from customers and suppliers is eligible for deduction under section 80IA and 80IC of the Act. The AO disallowed the deduction, whereas the Ld. CIT(A) allowed it. 11.4 In Phatela Cotgin Industries (supra