← 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

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 222/VIZ/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

Ld.CIT(A). Hence, the ground raised by the revenue is dismissed. 8. As far as Ground No. 2 is concerned, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA(8) of the Act. The case of the assessee is that the assessee company is having a captive power plant, therefore, the assessee claimed ... deduction u/s 80IA(8) in respect of power derived from the power plant. For this purpose, the assessee adopted a price of Rs.9.30 per unit of power consumed by its manufacturing units. The AO is of the view that the deduction can be granted only at the average price which

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 221/VIZ/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

Ld.CIT(A). Hence, the ground raised by the revenue is dismissed. 8. As far as Ground No. 2 is concerned, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA(8) of the Act. The case of the assessee is that the assessee company is having a captive power plant, therefore, the assessee claimed ... deduction u/s 80IA(8) in respect of power derived from the power plant. For this purpose, the assessee adopted a price of Rs.9.30 per unit of power consumed by its manufacturing units. The AO is of the view that the deduction can be granted only at the average price which

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 81/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

Ld.CIT(A). Hence, the ground raised by the revenue is dismissed. 8. As far as Ground No. 2 is concerned, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA(8) of the Act. The case of the assessee is that the assessee company is having a captive power plant, therefore, the assessee claimed ... deduction u/s 80IA(8) in respect of power derived from the power plant. For this purpose, the assessee adopted a price of Rs.9.30 per unit of power consumed by its manufacturing units. The AO is of the view that the deduction can be granted only at the average price which

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 80/VIZ/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

Ld.CIT(A). Hence, the ground raised by the revenue is dismissed. 8. As far as Ground No. 2 is concerned, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA(8) of the Act. The case of the assessee is that the assessee company is having a captive power plant, therefore, the assessee claimed ... deduction u/s 80IA(8) in respect of power derived from the power plant. For this purpose, the assessee adopted a price of Rs.9.30 per unit of power consumed by its manufacturing units. The AO is of the view that the deduction can be granted only at the average price which

Ga Infra Private Limited, Jaipur vs. PCIT, Jaipur-2

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 219/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Shailendra Sharma (CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

PCTT has further erred in holding that ld.AO has passed the order in routine and perfunctory manner and without examining the issue of deduction u/s 80IA, resulting into wrong deduction of income to the assessee. Appellant prays that all the conditions prescribed u/s 80IA are duly fulfilled by assessee ... factually incorrect. Thus, the assessment order so passed deserves to be uphold. 1.3. That, Id. PCIT has further erred in holding that deduction u/s 80IA as incorrect, by grossly ignoring that assessee has been regularly claiming the deduction on similar lines, which has been allowed to it, vide scrutiny assessments

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 315/IND/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri B.M. Biyani (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 2(30)Section 263Section 62Section 79Section 80I

subsequent years to recover the same from the beneficiary as and when it materialized in the books. Thus the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act for such DTL treating it as gross receipt towards the sale of power and directly deriving its source from the operating activity ... Income Tax (Appeals). The Ld CIT(A) allowed the claim of deduction of Rs. 30,58,04,134/- being DTL eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act as sale of power as per terms of Regulation No. 39 of tariff regulation issued vide Central Electricity Regulatory Commission Notification

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 314/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri B.M. Biyani (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 2(30)Section 263Section 62Section 79Section 80I

subsequent years to recover the same from the beneficiary as and when it materialized in the books. Thus the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act for such DTL treating it as gross receipt towards the sale of power and directly deriving its source from the operating activity ... Income Tax (Appeals). The Ld CIT(A) allowed the claim of deduction of Rs. 30,58,04,134/- being DTL eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act as sale of power as per terms of Regulation No. 39 of tariff regulation issued vide Central Electricity Regulatory Commission Notification

Viramgam Mahesana Projects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 220/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 220/Del/2018, A.Y. 2014-15 M/S. Viramgam Mahesana Vs. Acit Project Ltd. Cc-14, E-9, 3Rd Floor, New Delhi South Extension Part-Ii, New Delhi 110049 Pan : Aabcv7027L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 80I

which it develops or begins to operate. During the course of assessment proceedings, Ld. AO noticed that the assesses company has claimed deduction u/s 80IA amounting to Rs.3,52,36,118/-. The assessee was asked to furnish the details in support of its claim and after going through the details ... interest from fixed deposits of Rs.9122663/- in pour business income and on that basis the assessee company have calculated profit before tax and deduction u/s 80IA of the I.T. Act, 1961. From this it appear that the assessee company have calculated profit before tax and deduction u/s 80IA

Bsl Ltd., Rajasthan vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 31, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6612/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usbsl Ltd., Vs. Dcit 26, Industrial Area, Central Circle-31, Post Box No. 17, New Delhi. Gandhi Nagar, Bhilwara, Rajasthan-311 001 Pan No. Aabcb0639G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Satyajeet Goel, Adv. Revenue By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.05.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.08.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Assessee Is The Company Stated To Be Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Synthetic/Wollen/Worsted Yarn Fabrics & Synthetics Fabrics, Manufacturing & Trading Of Ready-Made Garments, Generation Of Power, Processing Of Synthetics Etc. Assessee Electronically Filed Its Return Of Income Bsl Ltd. Vs. Dcit 2

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 801Section 80I

case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the action of the assessing officer in disallowing the claim of statutory deduction u/s 80IA to the extent of Rs. 75,56,637/- by making adjustment of notional brought forward losses without appreciating the facts of the case and legal ... before the time of hearing.” 5. Ground no. 1 and its sub grounds are with respect to denying the claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. 6. During the course of assessment proceedings on perusing the return of income filed by the assessee, AO noticed that assessee has claimed

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur vs. M/S Animesh Ispat Private Limited, Raipur

ITA 14/RPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur28 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 14/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Acit-1(1) 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhawan Civil Lines, Raipur(C.G.)-492001 .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Animesh Ispat Private Limited Block-A, 2Nd Floor Maruti Business Park, G.E.Road Raipur (C.G.)-492001 Pan : Aaeca9084F ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Amit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ila.M.Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 92C

both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the assessee is regularly claiming deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in respect of profits derived from the captive power plant/ undertaking. The assessee transfers the power for captive ... power. Thus, according to him, the assessee has inflated the sale of power by Rs. 0.293 per unit and has accordingly inflated the deduction u/s 80IA by a sum of Rs.3.63 per unit. We find the Id. CIT (A)following various decisions including the decision of the Delhi Bench

The ACIT, Central-2, Indore vs. M/S. Shakti Pumps (India) Ltd., Indore

ITA 1358/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acit (Central)-2, Shakti Pumps (India) Ltd. Indore 226, Shastri Market, बनाम/ M.G. Road, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aaecs 5027 L Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti & Vijay Bansal, Ars Date Of Hearing 23/11/2022 / 22.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26.04.2023

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 263

placed reliance on the decision of Delhi Press Patra Prakashan [2006] 10 SOT 74 (Delhi) (URO). In this case, the assessee was claiming deduction u/s 80IA in respect of a Unit No.4. The said Unit was showing profit @ 62%. As against that, AO has noticed that a margin of profit

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi vs. Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1507/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 127/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 M/S. Ircon International Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax, C-4, Distt.-Centre, Saket Special Range-04, New Delhi-110017 New Delhi Pan : Aaaci0684H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80I

company has declared a profit of Rs. 844,28,48,066/-. 2.2 During the year under consideration Ld. AO examined a claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act, in regard to the work of contractor for the projects undertaken by the assessee company and was of the view that ... Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in allowing the deduction u/s 80IA amounting to Rs.90,68,76,022/- by rejecting the view of the AO that the agreement entered into by the assessee is of work-contract nature

Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi

ITA 127/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 127/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 M/S. Ircon International Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax, C-4, Distt.-Centre, Saket Special Range-04, New Delhi-110017 New Delhi Pan : Aaaci0684H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80I

company has declared a profit of Rs. 844,28,48,066/-. 2.2 During the year under consideration Ld. AO examined a claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act, in regard to the work of contractor for the projects undertaken by the assessee company and was of the view that ... Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in allowing the deduction u/s 80IA amounting to Rs.90,68,76,022/- by rejecting the view of the AO that the agreement entered into by the assessee is of work-contract nature

Rajesh Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Jpr

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 85/JPR/2023[2021-22]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur17 Apr 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: The Date Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Smt. Suhani Meharwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) a
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 44ASection 80J

claim of deduction should not be disallowed 12. ITAT Kolkata in case of DCIT vs Mackintosh Burn Limited held that the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA in revised ITR which replaces the original. Therefore, the certificate not filed with the original ITR does not form basis of disallowance

The ACIT Central-1, Bhopal vs. M/S Ramdev Sugars P Ltd, Indore

ITA 194/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Acit Central-1 M/S. Ramdev Sugars Pvt. Indore Ltd. बनाम/ 25, Nasia Road, Near Bus Stand, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aabcr 8097 G Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri Deepak Mantri, Ar Date Of Hearing 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2023

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80Section 80I

replied and clarified the conditions prescribed in section 80IA vis-à-vis claim of deduction as under: 1. The Company has claimed deduction u/s 80IA of Rs.78,36,085/- 2. The deduction has been claimed u/s 80IA(4)(iv) for generation of power. 3. The company produce power by using ... allowable to all captive power generating companies. 7. The assessee has got its scrutiny assessment done for last many years and the deduction u/s 80IA has been regularly allowed. The reply of the assessee is duly considered and after verification found acceptable as the assessee has engaged in business

M/S.Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Company P. Ltd, Idukki vs. The ACIT, Cochin

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

ITA 27/COCH/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Rohini Thampy, CA
Section 10Section 10(30)Section 30Section 801ASection 80I

assessable as per Rule 8 of the Income Tax Rules. 2. The Ld CIT(A) erred in not accepting the claim of deduction u/s 80IA of Rs 40,20,000/-. The CIT(A) ought to have held that the deduction u/s 80IA is allowable relying on the favourable order from ... received from Tea Board of India is disallowed fully. [Disallowance Rs. 1,34,75,103/-]” 2.4 The Ld.AO further observed that assessee claimed deduction u/s. 80IA being the expenditure incurred on substantial renovation of the undertaking engaged in the business of electricity distribution by treating it as separate industrial undertaking

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-2, Surat vs. M/S. Hi-Tech Sweet Water Technologies (P) Ltd., Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7/SRT/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), DR. A. L. SAINI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr- DR
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80I

three eligible undertakings u/s 80IA of the Act which are providing water treatment facilities to various State Government Organisations. The assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act of Rs.1,67,47,499/- and said deduction was allowed to assessee in the previous assessment years in assessment order passed u/s ... Learned CIT(A) who has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee, observing as follows:- “6. Ground No.1 is relating to disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act as the appellant did not file Form 10CCB alongwith the return of income. According to the AO, the deduction u/s 80IA

Mesers State Electricity Board, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(1), Raipur

In the result Ground no

ITA 58/RPR/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.58/Rpr/2020 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009) Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board, Vs Acit-1(1), Raipur Through Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Co. Limited (Earlier Cg State Power Holding Co Ltd.), O/O. Executive Director Finance- Cgsptcl, Ground Floor, Vidyut Seva Bhavan, Dangania, Raipur Pan No. :Aabcc 7876 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, Adv. & Shri PraveenFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 80I

erred in not following the decision of ITAT passed in the case of appellant itself for the AY 2007-08, wherein the deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iv) has been allowed. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred ... before us, two main issues are raised by this appeal: (1) Whether profits of assessee company, as claimed are eligible for deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iv) and (2) Whether disallowances of Rs. 74,05,37,325/- made by the assessing officer and confirmed by the Ld CIT(A) on account

The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax-2(1)Bhilai, Bhilai(Cg) vs. M/S Sms Shivnath Infrasstructure Pvt Ltd., Durg, Durg(Cg)

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 87/BIL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.87/Rpr/2017 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Acit-2(1), Bhilai Vs M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.,Toll Plaza, Near Dhamdhanaka, Durg. Pan No. :Aadcs 2258 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.107/Rpr/2016 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Vs Pr.Cit-2, Raipur Pvt Ltd.,Toll Plaza, Near Dhamdhanaka, Durg. Pan No. :Aadcs 2258 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, Adv. & MukeshFor Respondent: Shri Debashis Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 36Section 80ISection 80l

justified in giving the finding that, the impugned disallowance of Rs. 13,90,58,404/- is eligible for deduction U/S 80IA of the Act which is contrary to the finding of the AO, that the addition made by the assessee to the income eligible for deduction U/S 80IA ... basis and has built and is operating Durg by-pass road on National Highway No.7. Profit of this activity is eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA of the I T Act, the same has been claimed since A Y 2007-08 and allowed in all the years till date. During

M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Durg(Cg) vs. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 107/BIL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.87/Rpr/2017 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Acit-2(1), Bhilai Vs M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.,Toll Plaza, Near Dhamdhanaka, Durg. Pan No. :Aadcs 2258 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.107/Rpr/2016 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Sms Shivnath Infrastructure Vs Pr.Cit-2, Raipur Pvt Ltd.,Toll Plaza, Near Dhamdhanaka, Durg. Pan No. :Aadcs 2258 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, Adv. & MukeshFor Respondent: Shri Debashis Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 36Section 80ISection 80l

justified in giving the finding that, the impugned disallowance of Rs. 13,90,58,404/- is eligible for deduction U/S 80IA of the Act which is contrary to the finding of the AO, that the addition made by the assessee to the income eligible for deduction U/S 80IA ... basis and has built and is operating Durg by-pass road on National Highway No.7. Profit of this activity is eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA of the I T Act, the same has been claimed since A Y 2007-08 and allowed in all the years till date. During