← 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

DCIT (Ltu)-1, Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5935/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am Ι.Τ.Α. No. 5848/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Aditya Birla Nuvo Limited (Since Amalgamated With Grasim Industries Ltd.), Corporate Finance Division, A2, Aditya Birla Centre, A Wing, 2Nd Floor, S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400030. Pan: Aaaci1747H Vs. The Acit- Ltu-1, World Trade Centre, 29Th Floor, Centre-1, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No. 5935/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) The Dcit- Ltu-1, World Trade Centre, 29Th Floor, Centre-1, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Aditya Birla Nuvo Limited (Since Amalgamated With Grasim Industries Ltd.), Corporate Finance Division, A2, Aditya Birla Centre, A Wing, 2Nd Floor, S.K. Ahire Marg, Vs. Worli, Mumbai-400030. Pan : Aaaci1747H Respondent) Appellant) Appellant/Assessee By : Shri Ronak Doshi / Riken Shah, Ar Revenue/Respondent By : Shri Ashish Kumar Agrawal, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.07.2024 Order Per Padmavathy S, Am: These Cross Appeals By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-55, Mumbai Dated 27.06.2017 For

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi / Riken ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar Agrawal, Sr
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM

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

mill unit amounting to Rs.17,34,173/-. The CPC, Bangalore after processing return sent intimation under section 143(1) dated 01.05.2020 wherein the deduction under section 80IA(4) has been restricted to the extent of Rs.4,64,927/- as against Rs.17,34,173/- claimed by the appellant. Meaning thereby, deduction

Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward-6(1), Chennai vs. Sjlt Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 688/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.686, 687 & 688/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sjlt Textiles, 2E, 2Nd Floor, Prince Arcade Corporate Ward 6(1), Chennai 600 034. Cathedral Road, Chennai 600 086. [Pan: Aaics2028M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ar. V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhyaarthi, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: All The Above Three Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against Separate Orders Dated 30.03.2023 & 31.03.2023 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi For The Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhyaarthi, C.A
Section 80I

assessee generated power from Wind Mills, which was captively consumed by the assessee. The assessee claimed profit from the said windmills as deduction under section 80IA of the Act to the extent of ₹.3,40,61,684/-. In the scrutiny proceedings, the Assessing Officer opined that the assessee could ... assessee. Further, he vehemently put up that the assessee has artificially increased the profit from these undertakings which is eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Since the ld. CIT(A) failed to consider all these aspects, the ld. DR prayed to quash the order

Incometax Officer, Corporate Ward 6(1), Chennai vs. Sjlt Textiles, Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 687/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.686, 687 & 688/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sjlt Textiles, 2E, 2Nd Floor, Prince Arcade Corporate Ward 6(1), Chennai 600 034. Cathedral Road, Chennai 600 086. [Pan: Aaics2028M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ar. V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhyaarthi, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: All The Above Three Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against Separate Orders Dated 30.03.2023 & 31.03.2023 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi For The Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhyaarthi, C.A
Section 80I

assessee generated power from Wind Mills, which was captively consumed by the assessee. The assessee claimed profit from the said windmills as deduction under section 80IA of the Act to the extent of ₹.3,40,61,684/-. In the scrutiny proceedings, the Assessing Officer opined that the assessee could ... assessee. Further, he vehemently put up that the assessee has artificially increased the profit from these undertakings which is eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Since the ld. CIT(A) failed to consider all these aspects, the ld. DR prayed to quash the order

Incometax Officer, Corporate Ward 6(1), Chennai vs. Sjlt Textiles, Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 686/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.686, 687 & 688/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sjlt Textiles, 2E, 2Nd Floor, Prince Arcade Corporate Ward 6(1), Chennai 600 034. Cathedral Road, Chennai 600 086. [Pan: Aaics2028M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ar. V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhyaarthi, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: All The Above Three Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against Separate Orders Dated 30.03.2023 & 31.03.2023 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi For The Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhyaarthi, C.A
Section 80I

assessee generated power from Wind Mills, which was captively consumed by the assessee. The assessee claimed profit from the said windmills as deduction under section 80IA of the Act to the extent of ₹.3,40,61,684/-. In the scrutiny proceedings, the Assessing Officer opined that the assessee could ... assessee. Further, he vehemently put up that the assessee has artificially increased the profit from these undertakings which is eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act. Since the ld. CIT(A) failed to consider all these aspects, the ld. DR prayed to quash the order