Section 80IE of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.143

Section 80IE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 143 (Special provisions in respect of certain undertakings in North-Eastern States) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 143 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 80IE is CIT v. Sportking India Ltd. (324 ITR 283), cited in 22 of the 99 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80IE

CIT v. Sportking India Ltd.
324 ITR 283 · 2010 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Insurance compensation received for damage to stock-in-trade or raw materials is considered profit or loss from an industrial undertaking and is eligible for deduction under sections 80IA and 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

CIT v. Panama Chemical Works
108 Taxmann 189 · 2000 · Reported
3
citing judgments
Meghalaya Mineral Product v. ACIT
38 ITR (Trib) 186 · 2015 · ITAT
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 80IE

ACIT, Guwahati vs. Umesh Kumar Beriya, Guwahati, Assam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 362/GTY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati27 Aug 2026AY 2022-23
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 250Section 41(1)Section 801E

Nellie Ahmed, Guwahati vs. ACIT Cir-2, Guwahati

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

ITA 291/GTY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati27 Aug 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri S.P. Bhati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, DR
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 37Section 40Section 80Section 80I

Anjali Packaging, Sikkim vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2017/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2026AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80I

Mahashakti Cements, Guwahati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(1), Guwahati

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 286/GTY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati23 Jun 2026AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwala, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 263Section 80I

Sanjeevani Tea Industries, Assam vs. ITO, Ward - 1, Tinsukia, Assam

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

ITA 39/GTY/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati07 May 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21 Sanjeevani Tea Industries………………………………………..…..Appellant At Road, Talap Balibazar Talap Tinsukia, Assam-786156 [Pan: Abpfs4366R] Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Tinsukia….……………………………..……...…..…..Respondent Assam-786125 Appearances By: None, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2026

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80I

Plascom Industries LLP, Kolkata vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Guwahati

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 280/GTY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sanjay Jha, JCIT
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 801ESection 801E(3)Section 801E(4)Section 801E(5)Section 801E(6)Section 80I

Income Tax Officer, Morigaon vs. Progressive Fertichem Private Limited, Jagiroad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 114/GTY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati04 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am (Through : Virtual Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.114/Gty/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Ito Ward-Morigaon & Tps, Vs. Progressive Fertichem Pvt Ltd Marigaon, Assam-782105 Nizarapar Road, Near Lions Club, Jagiroad, Morigaon, Marigaon, Assam-782410 Pan No. : Aaecp 1451 B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Kishor Jain, Fca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Jain, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. DR
Section 80I

Nagahat Tea Estate Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Jorhat

ITA 20/GTY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

Nagahat Tea Estate Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Jorhat

ITA 19/GTY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

Nagahat Tea Estate Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Jorhat

ITA 18/GTY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

Shivam Pipe Industries, Guwahati vs. ITO Ward 2(2), Guwahati

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed

ITA 164/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati03 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: S.P. Bhati, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Kaushik Ray, JCIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 37Section 80I

Kanchenjunga Distilleries & Liquors, South Sikkim vs. DCIT, Circle 3(2), Gangtok

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 930/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Kanchenjunga Distilleries & Liquors C/O Subash Agarwal & Dcit, Circle 3(2), Gangtok Associates, Advocates Siddha Sikkim, West Bengal Vs. Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aamfk3402C Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Somnath Das Biswas, DR
Section 143(1)Section 80Section 80I

Greenzen Bio Pvt. Ltd., Siliguri vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru, Kolkata

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1101/KOL/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 80Section 80ASection 80ISection 80J

Keerti Flour Mills, Guwahati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Guwahati

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 99/GTY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: the first appellate authority and it was also prayed before him that the deduction under Section 80IE of the Act was due to the assessee and should have been allowed. The Ld. AR stated that due to non-condonation of delay by the first appellate authority, the assessee has been denied a justifiable claim under Section 80IE of the Act. The Ld. AR pleaded that the impugned order should be set aside and either his claim should be adjudicated on merit by this Bench or the matter could be, altern

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80I

Makhanlal Gattani, Jorhat vs. ITO, Ward-1, Jorhat

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 109/GTY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: the date of processing u/s.143(1) by the CPC. The claim of deduction has been denied only on technical grounds and not on the merits of the claim.

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 234CSection 250Section 80Section 80I

Keerti Flour Mills, Guwahati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3) Guwahati, Guwahati

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 100/GTY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: the first appellate authority and it was also prayed before him that the deduction under Section 80IE of the Act was due to the assessee and should have been allowed. The Ld. AR stated that due to non-condonation of delay by the first appellate authority, the assessee has been denied a justifiable claim under Section 80IE of the Act. The Ld. AR pleaded that the impugned order should be set aside and either his claim should be adjudicated on merit by this Bench or the matter could be, altern

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80I

Ratulia Samabay Krishi Unnyan Samiti Ltd., East Medinipur vs. I.T.O., Ward - 27(3), Haldia

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2409/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal & ShilpiFor Respondent: Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

Imperial Extrusions, Tezpur vs. ITO W-1(1), Guwahati

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

ITA 282/GTY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. P. Bhati, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Kaushik Ray, JCIT
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80I

Twinstar Jupiter Co-Op Hsg Soc Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 30(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3654/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 3654/Mum/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Twinstar Jupiter Co- V/S. Income Tax Officer, Operative Hsg Soc Ltd बिाम Ward 30(1)(1), Mumbai 41 Jupiter Apartments, Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai Cufe Parade, Colaba, 400051 Mumbai 400005. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaabt0015E Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Ashok Patil राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Asif Karmali (Sr Dr)

For Appellant: Shri Ashok PatilFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali (SR DR)
Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-2(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva vs. Kamlang Saw & Veneer Mills Pvt. Ltd., Assam

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 225/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 80I