Section 32A of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 32A is CIT v. Sesa Goa Ltd. (271 ITR 331), cited in 92 of the 84 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 32A

CIT v. Sesa Goa Ltd.
271 ITR 331 · 2004 · Supreme Court
92
citing judgments

Extraction and processing of iron ore constitutes "production" for the purpose of claiming tax benefits like investment allowance under Section 32A and additional depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia), even if it does not amount to "manufacture".

Aman Marble Industries (P.) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise
1 SCC 279 · 2005 · Supreme Court
18
citing judgments

The case clarified that activities like cutting marble blocks into slabs can constitute 'manufacture' for excise purposes, a principle relevant to understanding 'production' under Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, even if the earlier judgment did not explicitly interpret 'production'.

Department. 19. In CIT v. Sesa Goa Ltd.
13 SCC 548 · 2004 · Reported
10
citing judgments

The extraction and processing of iron ore, even if not amounting to the manufacture or production of an article or thing, can constitute 'production' for the purposes of claiming deductions under Section 80-IA and depreciation under Section 32-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

M/s. Puttur Petro Products Pvt. Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangalore
361 ITR 290 · 2014 · Reported
7
citing judgments
Similarly, in P Jayappan v. SK 26. Similarly, in P Jayappan Vs SK Perumal, First Income Tax Officer
149 ITR 696 · 1984 · Supreme Court
5
citing judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax-1, Mum v. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd.
84 Taxmann.com 215 · 2017 · Supreme Court
4
citing judgments
Gaurav Jain v. Gaurav Jain v. NCLT, Mumbai
130 Taxmann.com 23 · 2021 · Reported
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 32A

DCIT., Circle-13(1), Hyderabad vs. The Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Kothagudem

In the result, assessee’s appeals for the A

ITA 308/HYD/2024[AY-2020-2]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.283, 284 & 286/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Singareni Collieries Vs. Acit, Circle – 1 Company Limited Khammam & Kothagudem Acit, Circle 13(1) Pan:Aaact8873F Hyderabad & आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.300, 301 & 308/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21) Vs. Singareni Collieries Dy. Cit, Circle 13(1) Company Limited Hyderabad Kothagudem Pan:Aaact8873F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Balakrishna, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/06/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: These 3 Sets Of Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against The 3 Separate Orders All Dated 30/01/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Ys 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2020-21 Respectively. The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Have Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeals For 3 A.Ys:

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri B Balakrishna, CIT (DR)
Section 40A(9)