What is the leading case on Section 80IA(9) of the Income Tax Act?

PCIT v. Music Broadcast (P.) Ltd. (155 Taxmann.com 277) is the decision most relied on for Section 80IA(9), cited in 8 judgments.

Which cases are most cited on Section 80IA(9)?

PCIT v. Music Broadcast (P.) Ltd. (155 Taxmann.com 277) — 8 citing judgments; Cadilla Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT (81 Taxmann.com 379) — 7 citing judgments; Apar Industries Ltd. v. DCIT (117 Taxmann.com 970) — 5 citing judgments; Zee Enterprises Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (102 Taxmann.com 78) — 3 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 80IA(9)?

BharatTax indexes 32 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 80IA(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 80IA(9) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.138

Section 80IA(9) falls under section 80IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 138 (Deductions in respect of profits and gains from industrial undertakings or enterprises engaged in infrastructure development, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 138 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 80IA(9) is PCIT v. Music Broadcast (P.) Ltd. (155 Taxmann.com 277), cited in 8 of the 32 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80IA(9)

PCIT v. Music Broadcast (P.) Ltd.

155 Taxmann.com 277 · 2023 · High Court

citing judgments

Cadilla Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT

81 Taxmann.com 379 · 2017 · ITAT

citing judgments

Apar Industries Ltd. v. DCIT

117 Taxmann.com 970 · 2020 · Reported

citing judgments

Zee Enterprises Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

102 Taxmann.com 78 · 2019 · Reported

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 80IA(9)

Sarla Fashion Garments, New Delhi vs. JCIT, Range-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1799/DEL/2006[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2026AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 250Section 263Section 80Section 80ASection 80HSection 80I

M/S. Marico Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen. Cir. - 35, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue's appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 7124/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri MilinFor Respondent: Ms. Monica H Pande,SR AR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 80HSection 80I

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2) Now Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 524/AHD/2023[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR

Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2) Now Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 523/AHD/2023[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR

Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2) Now Circle- 1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 522/AHD/2023[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR

Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The DCIT, Circle-1 Now Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 521/AHD/2023[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2000-01

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR

Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

Sanmar Speciality Chemicals Ltd ( Successors to Intec Polymers Ltd), Chennai vs. ACIT RG 3(2)

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in term of the above

ITA 3651/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2023AY 2004-2005

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 801BSection 80HSection 80I

Sanmar Speciality Chemicals Ltd ( Successors to Intec Polymers Ltd), Chennai vs. ACIT RG 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in term of the above

ITA 3650/MUM/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2023AY 2003-2004

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 801BSection 80HSection 80I

The Dc.CC.44, Mumbai vs. M/S. Flat Products Equipments (I) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is disposed off as per the direction of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court as indicated above

ITA 4489/MUM/2007[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2004-05 Deputy Commissioner Of Flat Products Equipments Income Tax, Vs. Ltd. (Now Known As Cmi Ltu Circle 1, Fpe Limited), World Trade Centre – 1, Mehta House- 64, Road No. Cuffee Parade, 13, M.I.D.C., Andheri (E), Mumbai Mumbai – 400093 Pan No. Aaacf0252G Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Nishant Samaiya, Sr. Dr Assessee By : Ms. Sherry Goyal, Ar Date Of Hearing : 11/06/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2019

For Appellant: Ms. Sherry Goyal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nishant Samaiya, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80HSection 80I

Safepack Industries Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2376/PUN/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Dec 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 80HSection 80I

Goldtex Furnishing Industries, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2202/DEL/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Chandra Mohan Garg Shri Chandra Mohan Gargshri Chandra Mohan Garg Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate and Shri Deepesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80HSection 80I

DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata vs. Vesuvious India Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 563/KOL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Dec 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri Aby T.Varkey, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am ] I.T.A Nos.563&564/Kol/2011 Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05 D.C.I.T., Circle-10, -Vs.- Vesuvious India Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaacv 8995 Q] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, Jcit, Sr.Dr For The Respondent : Shri Harish Agarwal, Ar Date Of Hearing : 20.12.2016. Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2016. Order

For Appellant: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Harish Agarwal, AR

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80HSection 80I