← All Phrases

“section 80JJAA”

DeductionsSection 80JJAASection 80JJAA247 judgments

GETINGE MEDICAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA

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

ITA 4872/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 115Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 156Section 234ASection 270ASection 37Section 41Section 41(1)(a)

35CCD or under any provisions of Chapter VI- A under the heading "C". Deductions in respect of certain incomes" other than the provisions of section 80JJAA; (ii) without set off of any loss carried forward or depreciation from any earlier assessment year, if such loss or depreciation is attributable

DADA MOTOR ENTERPRISES LLP,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 25/CHANDI/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 25/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24 Dada Motor Enterprises Llp, Vs The Dcit, Savitri-Ii, Dholewal Chowk, Circle-1, Millerganj, S.O. Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aarfd7944D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.Cit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.03.2026 Hybrid Hearing O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 80J

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE RETAIL LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4244/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

Section 135Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 250Section 37(1)Section 80GSection 80JSection 92C

Explanation 2 to section 37(1) of the Act. Accordingly, deduction of Rs. 10,53,00,000/- was disallowed. ii. Restriction of deduction under section 80JJAA The assessee claimed deduction under section 80JJAA amounting to Rs. 12,31,53,732/- which included deduction pertaining to earlier assessment years. The Assessing ... Officer held that deduction under section 80JJAA is allowable only in respect of additional employee cost relating to the relevant assessment year and restricted the deduction to Rs. 5,94,89,560/- while disallowing Rs. 6,36,64,216/-. iii. Disallowance under section 14A The assessee made suo motu disallowance

RELIANCE RETAIL LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 8(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed,\nwhereas the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3510/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2026AY 2019-20
Section 135Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 250Section 80GSection 80JSection 92C

Explanation 2 to section\n37(1) of the Act. Accordingly, deduction of Rs. 10,53,00,000/-\nwas disallowed.\nii. Restriction of deduction under section 80JJAA\nThe\nassessee\nclaimed deduction under section 80JJAA\namounting to Rs. 12,31,53,732/- which included deduction\npertaining to earlier assessment years. The Assessing ... Officer held\nthat deduction under section 80JJAA is allowable only in respect\nof additional employee cost relating to the relevant assessment\nyear and restricted the deduction to Rs. 5,94,89,560/- while\ndisallowing Rs. 6,36,64,216/-.\niii. Disallowance under section 14A\nThe assessee made suo motu disallowance

SHAIRUL IMPEX,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT (INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 19(3)(1)), MUMBAI

ITA 6613/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2014-15
Section 147Section 148Section 151A

nrepresented in the form of asset as required in Section 149(1)(b) of the Act.\n41. As regards the claim of deduction under section 80JJAA of the Act, an issue\nof correctness of claim of deduction under Chapter VI of the Act, in our view,\ncannot be covered ... 10DA and it\nhas specifically been submitted by petitioner that software development activity\nconstitutes 'manufacture/production of article or thing'. The claim of deduction\nunder section 80JJAA of the Act was also disclosed in the Tax Audit Report\nfiled by petitioner alongwith the return of income. Further, during the\nassessment proceedings

NTT MANAGED SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1165/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.1165/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2023-2024 Ntt Managed Services India Private Limited, The Dcit, Vs. Hyderabad. Telangana. Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. Pin 500 081 Pan Aarcs7517G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By -None- राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Sri Mathivanan Sa, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04.03.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

For Respondent: Sri Mathivanan SA, Sr. AR
Section 108(8)Section 143(1)Section 80J

circumstances of the case. Ground No.2 The learned Additional / Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80JJAA of the Income-tax Act, 1961('IT Act') amounting to ₹6,91,250/- merely on the ground of alleged delay in filing of Form ... completely different factual matrix involving a statutory declaration undar section 108(8), which is distinguishable from Form 10DA 3 ITA.No.1165/Hyd./2025 required under section 80JJAA of the IT Act. Hence, the reliance placed by the CIT(A) is misplaced and does not apply to the present case. Ground No.5

SHRI MANAV VIKAS FOUNDATION,CHAMARAJ, TL. VADHAVAN vs. ITO, WARD-2(EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the asessee is allowed

ITA 723/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kakoli Uttam Ghosh, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 119(2)(b)Section 124(1)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

section (1) of section 12A, section 44AB [, section 44DA, section 50B), section 80-IA, section 80-1B, section 80-IC, section 80- ID, section 80JJAA, section 80LA, section 92E, (section 115JB 25 section 115JC] or section 115VW] (or to give a notice under clause (a) of sub-section

360 ONE DISTRIBUTION SERVICES LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS IIFL WEALTH CAPITAL MARKETS LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, THANE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5282/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Pritesh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80Section 80J

ground raised by the assessee on this\nissue, by observing as follows:\n“4.4 Ground No. 4- Deduction of Rs.3,06,30,724/- under Section 80JJAA of\nthe Act.\n4.4.1 This ground relates to the appellant's claim for deduction of\nRs.3,06,30,724/- under Section 80JJAA ... deduction.\n4.4.2 In view of the above, and considering the non-fulfilment of the\nmandatory procedural requirements, the appellant's claim for deduction\nunder Section 80JJAA cannot be entertained at this stage. Accordingly, this\nground of appeal is dismissed, and the appeal is not allowed.”\n10. Thus, the learned

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. PCIT-4,, CHENNAI

ITA 3261/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 154Section 263Section 80G

2020-21.Thereafter, in Finance Bill 2020 it was\nproposed to not to allow deduction under any provisions of Chapter\nVI-A other than section 80JJAA or section 80M of the Act, in case of\ndomestic companies opting for taxation under these sections with\neffect from 01 April

ZENSAR TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 3439/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
Section 10ASection 115JSection 142(1)Section 263Section 80GSection 80J

{"clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND\nSHRI ARUN

STUDDS ACCESSORIES LIMITED,FARIDABAD vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3570/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalkra, Adv &For Respondent: Sh. Avikal Manu, CIT DR
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 80J

arbitrarily sought to disregard the inquiry undertaken by the AO and submissions of the Appellant without elucidating any defect in deduction claimed under 7 section 80JJAA of the Act, suo-moto CSR disallowance claimed under section 37 of the Act, and expenditure reported in the books of accounts ... PCIT has not rendered any specific or speaking finding on the allegation of addition in relation to deduction under section 80JJAA of the Act (INR 56,44,273) and CSR expenses (INR 1,01,00,00) (refer pages 10-11 of the appeal set). The impugned order contains no reasoning

BUILT UP,PUNE vs. ADIT, BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2531/PUN/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Feb 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2019-20 Built Up Adit, Cpc, Bangalore 1, Samda Apartment, Vs. Dr Ketkar Margs, Ghodke Chowk, Pune – 411004 Pan: Aaefb6432D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri V L JainFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80I

held that when the audit report is filed before the final order of assessment, the assessee was entitled to claim deduction under 7 section 80JJAA. The relevant observations of the Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal from para-2 onwards read as under: “2. The short issue involved in this appeal

BASHIR JAFAR BHALDAR,SONAI SERVICES 1 SONAI SERVICES, BARAMATI ROAD IND vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD 14(5) PUNE, AAYAKAR SADAN BODHI TOWER SALASBURY PARK GULTEKDI

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

ITA 2919/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2919/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar DoshiFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 288Section 33BSection 44ASection 80J

deduction for any assessment year commencing on or before the 1st day of April, 2016.” 6. Perusal of the above sub-section (1) of section 80JJAA of the Act indicates that in a case if the assessee fulfils the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2) of section 80JJAA ... only taken note of the increase in employee number for the year under consideration but failed to take note of the provisions of section 80JJAA of the Act. Therefore I find that specific verification of the issue about the claim made u/s.80JJAA of the Act needs to be done

BAJAJ FINANCE LIMITED,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 565/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2019-20 Bajaj Finance Limited Pcit-3, Pune 3Rd Floor, Panchshil Tech Park, Vs. Viman Nagar, Pune – 411014 Pan: Aabcb1518L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwalla Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 06-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-01-2026

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 41Section 80J

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY

FIS GLOBAL BUSINESS SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 3595/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 3595/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Fis Global Business Solutions India Vs Dcit, Pvt. Ltd., S-405, Lgf, Greater Circle-7(1), Kailash, Part-Ii, Delhi-110048 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach2815H Assessee By : Ms. Sumish Murgai, Ca, Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. & Ms. Kashish Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Yogeshwer Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024–25/1074701797(1) Dated 19.03.2025, In Proceedings U/S 14(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Ms. Sumish Murgai, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Yogeshwer Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 14(3)Section 80A(5)Section 80J

appellant, the Hon’ble High Court had 3 FIS Global Business Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. held that the amendment brought into section 80JJAA of the Act, being clarificatory in nature, would apply retrospectively, and therefore, even though the second proviso to the said section was inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2019, its beneficial ... appellant have been duly considered. The appellant filed its ITR on 28.11.2018. The Finance Act, 2018 vide which the said amendment was made to section 80JJAA of the Act by way of insertion of second proviso thereto, received accent of the Hon’ble President of India

DCIT, CC-14, NEW DELHI vs. A.P. SECURITAS PVT. LTD, DELHI

In the result, application for condonation of delay of 52 days in filing of appeal is allowed and appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3077/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. A. P. Securitas Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-14, 10-Dda, Commercial Complex, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaca1315R

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80J

wisdom, consciously replaced the earlier provision (restricting its scope to limited sections) and made the condition applicable to all deductions under Chapter VIA, including Section 80JJAA.  Therefore, compliance with the due date prescribed under Section 139(1) is a condition precedent for claiming deduction. Filing the return within the extended ... return of income on the same day along with tax audit report including CA’s certificate in Form 10DA for claim of deduction under section 80JJAA of the Act.” 8. In para 8 and 8.1 the ld CIT(A) observed as under:- “8. Aforesaid discussions are summed up as under

CHARCHIT GARG,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 306/IND/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 44ASection 80J

Year 2022-23, the assessee filed his return of income on 18.10.2023 declaring a total income of ₹46,49,812/- after claiming deduction under section 80JJAA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 amounting to ₹4,58,090/-. The tax liability of ₹12,55,741/- was duly discharged through TDS, advance ... under section 143(1) of the Act on 31.07.2024. While processing the return, the Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction claimed under section 80JJAA of the Act on the ground that the assessee had not furnished the prescribed audit report in Form No. 10DA within the due date prescribed under

VASHISHTHA LUXURY FASHION LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRALISED PROCESSING CENTER, BENGALURU,

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

ITA 1665/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal(virtually appeared)For Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

section 35 or section 35AD or section 35CCC or section 35CCD or under any provisions of Chapter VI-A other than the provisions of section 80JJAA or section 80M; (ii) without set off of any loss carried forward or depreciation from any earlier assessment year, if such loss or depreciation

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. TRIMASTER PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 955/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2021-22 Assistant Commissioner Of Trimaster Private Limited, Income Tax, Room No.192A, 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, First Floor, C.R. Building, Ito, Vs New Delhi-110020 Delhi-110002 Pan-Aaacn0138P Assessee Revenue Cross Objection No.119/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.955/Del/2025 ) [Assessment Year: 2021-22 Trimaster Private Limited, Assistant Commissioner Of Income 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, Tax, Room No.192A, First Floor, New Delhi-110020 Vs C.R. Building, Ito, Delhi-110002 Pan-Aaacn0138P Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Nitini Kumar Sharma, Ca Revenue By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 07.01.2026

Section 10ASection 115BSection 143(3)Section 32Section 32ASection 33ASection 35Section 35ASection 35C

section 35 or section 35AD or section 35CCC or section 35CCD or under any provisions of Chapter VI-A other than the provisions of section 80JJAA or section 80M; (ii) without set off of any loss carried forward or depreciation from any earlier assessment year, if such loss or depreciation ... section 35 or section 35AD or section 35CCC or section 35CCD or under any provisions of Chapter VI-A other than the provisions of section 80JJAA or section 80M in previous year(s). Thus the assesse company has failed to prove that the loss of Rs.2

SATARA ENGINEERING PROJECTS AND EQUIPMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SATARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA

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

ITA 2450/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2450/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2024-25

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar &For Respondent: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

section 35 or section 35AD or section 35CCC or section 35CCD or under any provisions of Chapter VI-A other than the provisions of section 80JJAA or section 80M; (ii) without set-off of any loss or allowance for unabsorbed depreciation deemed so under section 72A where such loss

Showing 1–20 of 247 · Page 1 of 13

...