“new employees”

DeductionsSection 80JJAASection 80JJAA69 judgments

The decision most relied on for new employees is PCIT v. New Delhi Television Ltd. (398 ITR 57), cited in 42 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on new employees

PCIT v. New Delhi Television Ltd.

398 ITR 57 · 2017 · High Court

citing judgments

Expenditure on Employees Stock Options Plan (ESOP) compensation is an ascertained liability and is allowable as revenue expenditure.

26 (Delhi) PCIT v. New Delhi Television Ltd.

99 Taxmann.com 401 · 2018 · High Court

citing judgments

Expenditure arising from Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) compensation is an allowable revenue expenditure deductible under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

International Tractors Ltd. v. DCIT

435 ITR 85 · 2021 · High Court

citing judgments

The Delhi High Court allowed deduction under Section 80JJAA even if the claim was made during assessment proceedings, provided the claim was otherwise sustainable in law.

Akuntha Projects (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Director-CPC

162 Taxmann.com 861 · 2024 · ITAT

citing judgments

A claim for deduction under Section 80JJAA cannot be denied solely because Form 10DA was not filed within the prescribed time, especially if the requisite audit report was available to the Assessing Officer before the assessment order was framed. Procedural lapses or mistakes in filing the form do not justify denial of the claim.

Bosch Ltd. v. ACIT, LTU, Banglore

74 Taxmann.com 161 · 2016 · ITAT

citing judgments

An assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 80JJAA as long as an employee has worked for 300 days, even if this period is split across the assessment year or financial year. The deduction under Section 80JJAA is allowed for three years, including the year employment is provided, and each year requires verification of at least 300 days of work by a non-casual employee.

Judgments citing new employees

Astrazeneca Pharma India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 284/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Sri Nikhil Tiwari, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

business effectively as it helps to retain the employee talent, thereby reducing the attrition of employees and reducing the additional recruitment cost of hiring new employees, training the employees etc. 7.2 In this regard, he placed reliance on the decision of the Special Bench in the case of Biocon

K N M Mills Private Limited, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Corp Ward, Coimbatore

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

ITA 1431/CHNY/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1431/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23 V. M/S.K N M Mills Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, 584A, D.B.Road, Corporate Ward, R.S.Puram, Coimbatore. Coimbatore-641 002. [Pan: Aaack 8972 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

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

filed return of income returning taxable income of Rs.1,34,56,120/- under normal provisions and claimed deduction u/s.80JJAA of the Act,[for employing new employees for encouraging generation of employment since 01.04.1991]. However, while processing return of income u/s.143(1) of the Act, the CPC disallowed the claim

M/S. International Tractors Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT(Ltu), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3811/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshinternational Tractors Ltd, Vs. Dcit (Ltu), Sonalika House, 282, Nbcc Plaza, Pushp Agcr Enclave, Vihar, Sector-Iii, Karkardooma, Delhi- New Delhi 110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaci2270H Dcit (Ltu) International Tractors Ltd, New Delhi Sonalika House, 282, Agcr Enclave, Karkardooma, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaci2270H

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Bhutani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80J

asking for employee list of the years 2005-06 to 2008-09 along with muster roll and attendance sheet; appointment letters of old and new employees along with resignation letters of the employees who left the organization and also to explain why deduction u/s 80JJAA

DCIT(Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. International Tractors Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3663/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Bhutani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80J

Gsp Crop Science Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 396/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2018-19 Gsp Crop Science Pvt.Ltd. The Principal Cit, 404, Lalita Complex Vs Ahmedabad-1 Rasal Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad City Ahmedabad – 380 009, Gujarat Pan: Aaacg 7984 Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Shri M.K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/02/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Ms.Suchitra Kamblethis Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28/03/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Ahmedabad-1. [“Cit(A)” In Short] For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: “(1) That On Facts & In Law, The Learned Pcit Has Grievously Erred In Exercising Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act. (2) That On Facts & In Law, The Learned Pcit Has Grievously Erred In Holding That Rs.9,98,678/- Is Required To Be Disallowed U/S 14A Of The Act. Gsp Crop Science Pvt.Ltd. Vs. The Pr.Cit Asst.Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 35Section 80J

u/s.80JJAA of the Act for the year under consideration. But it was noticed that the assessee has claimed deduction u/s.80JJAA (employment of new employees) of Rs.17,82,400/- for the year under consideration. The Pr.CIT further observed that assessee claimed employees’ compensation of Rs.181 lakhs, loss of asset

M/S.Hdb Financial Services Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 177/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80J

Form 10DA. - attached vide Annexure – 7. The working prepared by chartered accountant at time of preparing certificate is as under: Working to arrive at new employees eligible for deduction u/s 8OJJAA Particulars Number of Employees As on March 31, 2016 58,807 New Joinees during financial year

Manufacture Francaise Des Pneumatiques Michelin, France vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2)(1), (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 521/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2016-17

going technical support in the process of quality control at each stage of the manufacturing and distribution process, preparing trainings and workshops for new employees of quality departments and programs to improve skills of existing employees, etc. o Security department (DGS): It includes developing general policy on asset security, ensuring

M/S. Maa Tarani Logistics Ltd, Joda vs. ACIT Cir.-1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 140/CTK/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack21 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & And Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Maa Tarani Logistics M/S Maa Tarani Logistics Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-1(1), Ltd., Ltd., Unchabali, Unchabali, Po: Po: Cuttack Bamabri, Bamabri, Via Via- Joda, Keonjhar Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaecm 7549 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By Assessee By : S/Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Jaydeep Soumitra Choudhury & Jaydeep Chakraborty, Advocates Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. Cit (Osd) Pr. Cit (Osd) Date Of Hearing : 21/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/0 /08/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), , Nfac, Nfac, Delhi, Dated 27.3.2023 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1051397448(1) For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. S/Shri Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Jaydeep Chakraborty, Advocates Soumitra Choudhury & Jaydeep Chakraborty, Advocates Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld. Pr.Cit (Osd) Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld. Pr.Cit (Osd) Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam, Ld. Pr.Cit (Osd) Appeared For The Reve Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: S/Shri Soumitra Choudhury & JaydeepFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. CIT (OSD)

Section 127Section 127(2)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 1aSection 234Section 68

that as and when the employee has resigned or left the company, the shares have been purchased back or taken back and sold to new employees on account of which the no. of shareholders representing the employees of Triveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd., has reduced to 562 during the Financial year