← All Phrases

“deduction u/s 80IA”

DeductionsSection 80IASection 80IA745 judgments

The decision most relied on for deduction u/s 80IA is CIT v. ABG Heavy Industries Ltd. (322 ITR 323), cited in 229 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on deduction u/s 80IA

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. ITC Ltd.
236 Taxmann 612 · 2016 · High Court
108
citing judgments

When computing deduction under Section 80IA, specifically for inter-unit transfer of power, the benefit cannot be claimed based on rates chargeable by distribution licensees to consumers. The deduction must be computed based on the rate fixed by the Tariff Regulation Commission for sale by electricity generating companies.

CIT v. Jawahar Bhattacharjee
341 ITR 434 · 2012 · High Court
99
citing judgments

An assessment order is erroneous for the purpose of Section 263 if the Assessing Officer fails to apply mind to relevant material, proceeds on an incorrect assumption of facts, or makes an incorrect application of law.

M/s Tamilnadu Petro Products Ltd. v. ACIT
338 ITR 643 · 2011 · High Court
56
citing judgments

For the purpose of Section 80IA relief, the sale of power is not a criterion for granting relief. Captive consumption of power must be valued at market price, and classification of units as saleable or non-saleable is irrelevant for determining the Arm's Length Price (ALP).

Mohan Breweries & Distilleries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
116 ITD 241 · 2009 · ITAT
27
citing judgments

The initial assessment year for claiming deduction under Section 80-IA is the first year the assessee actually claims the deduction, not necessarily the first year the enterprise is set up. The deduction under Section 80-IA applies only from the assessment year in which the claim is first made.

CIT v. Anil H. Lad
45 Taxmann.com 98 · 2014 · High Court
20
citing judgments

For the purpose of computing deduction under Section 80-IA, profits of other businesses do not need to be notionally brought forward and have no effect on the deduction claimed. Losses of earlier years already set off cannot be notionally set off again against current income eligible for deduction.

PCIT v. Surya Merchands Ltd.
387 ITR 105 · 2016 · High Court
19
citing judgments

The requirement to furnish an audit report along with the return of income under Section 80IA(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is directory and not mandatory, and will be satisfied if the report is filed during the assessment proceedings.

Patil & Sons Belgaum Constructions (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT. 7. Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai Bench-C
76 Taxmann.com 105 · 2016 · Reported
17
citing judgments

This case is cited for the proposition that deductions under sections 80IA and 80IAB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are not available for infrastructure facilities unless they are specifically enumerated in the relevant sub-sections.

Judgments citing deduction u/s 80IA

Ajr Infra and Tolling Limited (Formerly Gammon Infrastructure Projects Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-41 (Presently With D.C.I.T. Cent. Cir. - 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2620/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 80I

sake of convenience. 2. The only issue agitated in all these appeals related to the eligibility of the assessee to claim deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. Since both the tax authorities have held that the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80IA 2 AJR Infra and Tolling Limited ... following three companies:- (a) Mumbai Nasik Expressway Ltd (b) Kosi Bridge Infrastructure Company Ltd (c) Gorakhpur Infrastructure Company Ltd The assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in respect of fees received by it from the above said three companies. 4. The above said three companies are Special Purpose

Ajr Infra and Tolling Limited (Formerly Gammon Infrastructure Projects Ltd)., Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-41 (Presently With D.C.I.T. Cent. Cir. - 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2619/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 80I

sake of convenience. 2. The only issue agitated in all these appeals related to the eligibility of the assessee to claim deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. Since both the tax authorities have held that the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80IA 2 AJR Infra and Tolling Limited ... following three companies:- (a) Mumbai Nasik Expressway Ltd (b) Kosi Bridge Infrastructure Company Ltd (c) Gorakhpur Infrastructure Company Ltd The assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in respect of fees received by it from the above said three companies. 4. The above said three companies are Special Purpose

Sanjay Kukreja, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 54(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 652/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.652/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 बनाम Sanjay Kukreja, Acit A-362, Defence Colony, Vs. Circle-54(1), New Delhi. New Delhi.

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 44ASection 80Section 80I

10CCB for the deduction claimed u/s 80IA of the Act. The return was processed u/s 143(1) on 26.08.2020 denying the claim for deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. The assessee filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and contended that filing of Form 10CCB along with the return of income ... only directory and not mandatory. However, the Ld.CIT(A) rejected the claim of the assessee and sustained the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee placing reliance on various judgments of various High Courts including the jurisdictional High Court in the case

Shri.Prakash R. Nair, Kollam vs. DCIT, Kollam

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 141/COCH/2021[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasprakash R. Nair Dy.Cit, Central Circle Prop. Dhanya Foods Kollam Kochuppilammoodu Vs. Kollam 691001 [Pan:Abfpn4424P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 148(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80Section 801A(9)Section 80HSection 80I

purpose of deduction u/s. 80-IA, however, remained unaltered at Rs.275.32 lakhs (including rs.13.54 lakhs by way of processing commission), claiming deduction u/s. 80IA @ 25% at Rs.68.83 lakhs, i.e., as per the original return. The restriction u/c. VIA at Rs.4,14,67,212 (i.e., inclusive of Rs.19,500 u/ss. 80L/80G ... vide notice u/s. 274 of even date: 2 Prakash R. Nair v. Dy.CIT, Central Circle i. Claim for deduction u/s 80IA(Rs.68,82,867/-) was rejected. ii. Bank interest of Rs. 3,13,508/- was assessed as ‘Income from Other Sources’. iii. The claim for deduction u/s 80HHC was restricted

D.C.I.T., Circle-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Birla Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as cross-objection of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1964/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1964/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dcit, Circle-6(1), Kolkata…………….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Birla Corporation Ltd…………...........…..........................…..…..... Respondent Birla Building, 9/1, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata – 700001. [Pan: Aabcb2075J] C.O. 39/Kol/2019 (A/O I.T.A. No.1964/Kol/2019) Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S Birla Corporation Ltd…………...........….....................…..…..... Cross-Objector Birla Building, 9/1, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata – 700001. [Pan: Aabcb2075J] Vs Dcit, Circle-6(1), Kolkata…………….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 16, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal By The Revenue & The Corresponding Cross Objections By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Order Dated 30.05.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). First, We Take Up Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.1964/Kol/2019. I.T.A. No.1964/Kol/2019 & C.O. 39/Kol/2019 M/S Birla Corporation Ltd

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 80I

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in Law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that deduction u/s 80IA of the IT Act will be allowed as claimed by the assessee. 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case as well ... market value of electricity and the assessee did not commit any error in adopting such price for working out the amount eligible for deduction u/s 80IA of the Act.” I.T.A. No.1964/Kol/2019 & C.O. 39/Kol/2019 M/s Birla Corporation Ltd 14. After coming to the conclusion that the decision

Housing Devp. Fin.Corpn. Ltd vs. The ADIT Cir. 1(1)

ITA 552/MUM/2004[98-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2024

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 144Section 14ASection 36(1)(viii)

1 ITA 552/Mum/2004 Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI

Celebi Delhi Cargo Terminal Management India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 9210/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

during the appeal proceedings such documentary evidence of substantive nature to justify that Delhi International Airport Limited is a statutory body for claiming deduction u/s 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The appellant seeks permission to add, delete or modify all/any ground(s) of appeal at the time ... cargo terminal and the common area and to operate, manage and maintain the same for rendering the cargo services. Consequently, the company claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act for the profits derived from the said activity for A.Y. 2011-12. This deduction was allowed to the assessee in A.Ys

Pragati Power Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-20(1), New Delhi

ITA 1168/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. P. N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 35Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of learned Assessing Officer in restricting the claim of deduction u/s 80IA to Rs.189,92,38,797/- against the appellant claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act of Rs.228,41,50,029/- in complete disregard ... view of provisions of section 80IA(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the profit from the eligible business for the purpose of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act has to be computed before set off losses of the other undertaking of the assessee." 3. Since, the deduction eligible

DCIT Corporate Circle 5 (1), Chennai vs. M/S Olympia Tech Park (Chennai) Pvt Ltd (Successor of M/S Khivraj Tech Park), Chennai

ITA 1704/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Ajith Chordia, CA
Section 80I

erred in allowing the assessee's claim of netting off of interest income with interest expenditure on bank deposits for the purpose of deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iii). 4.2 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that only income derived from operation and maintenance qualify for the deduction ... Tech Park is a partnership firm filed its return of income for the assessment year 2012-13, declaring Nil total income after claiming deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). de: ITA, No:1704/Chny/2018 The case was selected for scrutiny

Asst CIT (Ltu) 1, Mumbai vs. Grasim Industries Limited (As A Successor to Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1248/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

action of AO in adding the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act to book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. 3 Reduction in deduction u/s 80IA of the Act by increasing the input cost by including the component of excise duty / service tax / VAT claimed as CENVAT credit. 4 Upholding ... respectfully following the judicial decisions cited supra and considering the facts of the case, hold that the appellant is eligible to claim the deduction u/s 80IA of I.T. Act. 1961, I direct the AO to delete the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA of Rs.2.17.27.798/- made in the assessment order. Accordingly

Grasim Industries Limited (As A Successor to Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1065/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

action of AO in adding the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act to book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. 3 Reduction in deduction u/s 80IA of the Act by increasing the input cost by including the component of excise duty / service tax / VAT claimed as CENVAT credit. 4 Upholding ... respectfully following the judicial decisions cited supra and considering the facts of the case, hold that the appellant is eligible to claim the deduction u/s 80IA of I.T. Act. 1961, I direct the AO to delete the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA of Rs.2.17.27.798/- made in the assessment order. Accordingly

DCIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd., Mumbai City

In the result, appeals of the revenue and CO’s of assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2032/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 90/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri . East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 91/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg0569P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Dr) C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements Ltd सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & Respective Cross Objections (‘Co’) Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 31-03-2023 For Ay 2008-09 & Ay 2010-11 Respectively.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (DR)
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

that the L&T Ltd. on whose request the private sidings were set up at all these four locations, never claimed any such deduction u/s 80IA(4). The deductions are being claimed by the assessee company since AY. 2004-05, after the various cements plants were transferred to the assessee ... laws held that the assessee is eligible for deduction us BOIA in profits from rail system. Accordingly, the AO was directed to allow deduction u/s 80IA. Now the department is in appeal here before the Tribunal. C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements

DCIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue and CO’s of assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2031/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 90/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri . East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 91/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg0569P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Dr) C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements Ltd सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & Respective Cross Objections (‘Co’) Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 31-03-2023 For Ay 2008-09 & Ay 2010-11 Respectively.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (DR)
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

that the L&T Ltd. on whose request the private sidings were set up at all these four locations, never claimed any such deduction u/s 80IA(4). The deductions are being claimed by the assessee company since AY. 2004-05, after the various cements plants were transferred to the assessee ... laws held that the assessee is eligible for deduction us BOIA in profits from rail system. Accordingly, the AO was directed to allow deduction u/s 80IA. Now the department is in appeal here before the Tribunal. C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements

Nhdc Limited, Bhopal vs. DCIT - 3(1), Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed, Cross appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for statistical purposes and CO is dismissed being infructuous

ITA 40/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninhdc Limited Dcit, 3(1) F-01, Nhdc Parisar, Shyamla Bhopal Vs. Hills Bhopal -462013 (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aabcn 1732G Dcit, 3(1) Nhdc Limited Bhopal F-01, Nhdc Parisar, Vs. Shyamla Hills Bhopal -462013 (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcn 1732G

Section 143(3)Section 80I

assessee filed its return of income for year under consideration on 24.11.2015 declaring total income of Rs.99,64,25,200/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IA of Rs.981,68,80,417/-. In the scrutiny assessment completed u/s 143(3) the AO has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IA in respect ... Grand total (ISPS & OSPS) 82,61,40,872 2.1. Thus, the AO made disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA to the tune of Rs.82,61,40,872/-. Apart from the above disallowance the AO also disallowed the deduction u/s 80IA of Rs.47,65,54,173/- on account of deferred tax liabilities

DCIT 3 (1), Bhopal vs. M/S Nhdc Ltd, Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed, Cross appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for statistical purposes and CO is dismissed being infructuous

ITA 316/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninhdc Limited Dcit, 3(1) F-01, Nhdc Parisar, Shyamla Bhopal Vs. Hills Bhopal -462013 (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aabcn 1732G Dcit, 3(1) Nhdc Limited Bhopal F-01, Nhdc Parisar, Vs. Shyamla Hills Bhopal -462013 (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcn 1732G

Section 143(3)Section 80I

assessee filed its return of income for year under consideration on 24.11.2015 declaring total income of Rs.99,64,25,200/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IA of Rs.981,68,80,417/-. In the scrutiny assessment completed u/s 143(3) the AO has disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IA in respect ... Grand total (ISPS & OSPS) 82,61,40,872 2.1. Thus, the AO made disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA to the tune of Rs.82,61,40,872/-. Apart from the above disallowance the AO also disallowed the deduction u/s 80IA of Rs.47,65,54,173/- on account of deferred tax liabilities

Fatehpuria Transformers and Witchgears Pvt. Ltd, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

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

ITA 387/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar MathurFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 801ASection 801A(5)Section 80I

income of Rs. 61,93,260/- on 21.02.2014 by making certain additions. While doing so, the AO disallowed the assessee's claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in respect of power generation unit of Rs. 19,93,833/-. Subsequently, the AO 3 Fatehpuria Transformers and Switchgears ... DCIT came to know that, while filing the original return of income, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in respect of power generation unit without deducting notional brought forward losses and depreciation relating to earlier AYs. Similarly, while framing the original assessment order u/s

National Aluminium Company Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. Principal CIT-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 62/CTK/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Girish Agrawalassessment Year : 2016-17 National National Aluminium Aluminium Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle -1(2), Company Limited., Nalco Company Limited., Nalco Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhawan, Bhawan, Nayapalli, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaacn 7449 M (Appellant) ) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Ca & Shri P. Venugopal Rao, Ca Venugopal Rao, Ca Revenue By : Dr.Abani Kanta Nayak, Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/11 11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/11 /11/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CA and Shri P. Venugopal Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr.Abani Kanta Nayak
Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 263Section 43B

Account and evidence in support of payment of the same. 8. From the return it Is found that you have claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. In this regard please explain how the same is admissible under the provisions of the Act. 9. From 3CD it is found that

Gateway Terminals India Pvt. Ltd., Raigad vs. DCIT- Panvel -Circle Panvel, Panvel

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

ITA 3160/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Gateway Terminals Pvt. Ltd. Raigad, Gti House, Jawaharlal Income Tax Nehru Port, Panvel-Circle Panvel Nhava Sheva, 3Rd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Taluka-Uran, Plot No.2 & 2A, Sector 17, Dist. Raigad, Opp.Khanda Colony, Maharashtra-400707 New Panvel, Panvel Maharashtra-410206 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccg1899E Assessee By : Manish Kant Kiran Nisar, Ars Revenue By : Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023

For Appellant: Manish KantFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 801ASection 80ISection 92C

that when scrap sold by the assessee has direct nexus with the business of the infrastructure facility, such income should be eligible for deduction u/s 80IA [4] of the Act. It is not the claim of revenue that such scrap sale is of totally unrelated items to the business

Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Gurugram

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4865/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshacit, Vs. Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd, 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Shopping Mall Circle-1(1), Gurugram Complex, Arjun Marg, Dkf City, Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccd3572H Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd, Vs. Addl. Cit, 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Shopping Mall Range-I, Complex, Arjun Marg, Dkf City, Gurgaon Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccd3572H

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. T. James Singson, CIT DR
Section 24Section 32(1)Section 801ASection 801A(4)

assessee is challenging head of income under which lease rental earned from the leasing of units in industrial park qualifying for deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iii) of the Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee company was incorporated ... Assessment Year 2011-12 was filed by the assessee on 30.09.2011 declaring total income of Rs. 23,23,65,400/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IA of Rs. 377,32,99,956/- and deduction 80IA of Rs. 202,88,73,784/-. This return was later revised on 29.03.2012 declared total income

Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Gurugram

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4864/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshacit, Vs. Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd, 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Shopping Mall Circle-1(1), Gurugram Complex, Arjun Marg, Dkf City, Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccd3572H Dlf Cyber City Developers Ltd, Vs. Addl. Cit, 3Rd Floor, B-Wing, Shopping Mall Range-I, Complex, Arjun Marg, Dkf City, Gurgaon Phase-I, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaccd3572H

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. T. James Singson, CIT DR
Section 24Section 32(1)Section 801ASection 801A(4)

assessee is challenging head of income under which lease rental earned from the leasing of units in industrial park qualifying for deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iii) of the Act. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee company was incorporated ... Assessment Year 2011-12 was filed by the assessee on 30.09.2011 declaring total income of Rs. 23,23,65,400/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IA of Rs. 377,32,99,956/- and deduction 80IA of Rs. 202,88,73,784/-. This return was later revised on 29.03.2012 declared total income