CIT vs. SADAN VIKAS INDIA LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The Delhi High Court agreed with the Gujarat High Court's reasoning that the date of DSIR approval is not a cut-off date, and the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction for expenses incurred if the R&D facility is subsequently approved.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed a weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) for R&D expenses. The DSIR granted recognition and approval for these expenses in the subsequent assessment year, which the Assessing Officer and CIT(Appeal) disallowed.
What were the issues?
Whether the weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) can be claimed for expenses incurred prior to the formal approval by the Competent Authority (DSIR).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cited by 112 judgments on BharatTax
See all citing judgments →Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.
- Flamingo Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Sion Trombay Road Chembur v. DCIT Circle-14(1)(2), Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K…Mumbai · 2025-12-17
- Nitta Gelatin India Limited, Kochi v. Corporate Circle 2(1), KochiCochin · 2025-11-19
- Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi v. DCIT, New DelhiDelhi · 2025-10-08
- DCIT, New Delhi v. M/S. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New DelhiDelhi · 2025-10-08
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aurangabad v. Endurance Technoligies Limited, AurangabadPune · 2025-08-25
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Claris Lifesciences Ltd.196 citing326 ITR 251 · 2010 · HC
ITA No.348/2011
Page 1 of 5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ I.T.A. No.348/2011
% Date of Decision: 24.02.2011
The Commissioner of Income Tax - III …. Appellant Through: Ms.Rashmi Chopra, Sr. Standing Counsel.
Versus
Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd. …. Respondent Through: Mr.S. Krishnan, Advocate
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA
Whether reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No.
A.K. Sikri, J. (ORAL) *
CM No.3499/2011
For the reasons stated in the application, delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
The application is disposed of.
2011:DHC:1161-DB
ITA No.348/2011
Page 2 of 5 ITA No.348/2011
The assessee claims that it is engaged in the business of manufacturing of automotive air conditioning and is also undertaking research and development activity in this behalf. In the assessment year, i.e., assessment year 2005-2006, the assessee claimed a deduction of `3,83,62,003/- under Section 35 (2AB) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The business expenses incurred are naturally allowed as deductions, however, the aforesaid provisions gives weighted deduction to the assessees, who are engaged into research and development activity. The objective is to encourage research and development by the business enterprises in India.
The provision further states that in order to claim this weighted deduction, it is to be certified by the Competent Authority that the assessee had undertaken research and development activity. The competent authority in this behalf is Department of Scientific & Industrial Research (DSIR). The assessee had approached DSIR vide application dated 10th January, 2005. The DSIR vide its letter dated 23rd February, 2006 granted recognition of the in-house R&D facilities of the assessee company and also granted approval for the expenses incurred by the company on in-house R&D facility in prescribed form 2011:DHC:1161-DB
ITA No.348/2011
Page 3 of 5 3CM by letter dated 18th September, 2006. The Assessing Officer, however, refused to accord the benefit of the aforesaid provisions of weighted deduction to the assessee on the ground that recognition and approval was given by the DSIR in February/September 2006, i.e., in the next assessment year and, therefore, the assessee was not entitled to the benefit. The CIT(Appeal) accepted this view of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal, however, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) has come to the conclusion that the assessee would be entitled to weighted deductions of the aforesaid expenditure incurred by the assessee in terms of the Section 35(2AB) of the Act and in coming to this conclusion, the Tribunal has relied upon the judgment of Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Claris Lifesciences Ltd., 326 ITR 251. We have gone through the aforesaid judgment of the Gujarat High Court and find that Gujarat High Court detailed in no-uncertain terms that the cut-off date mentioned in the certificate issued by the DSIR would be of no relevance. What is to be seen is that the assessee was in indulging in R&D activity and had incurred the expenditure thereupon. Once a certificate by DSIR is issued, that would be sufficient to hold that the assessee fulfills the conditions laid down in the aforesaid provisions. The discussions, which is undertaken by the 2011:DHC:1161-DB
ITA No.348/2011
Page 4 of 5 Gujarat High Court while interpreting the aforesaid provisions, is extracted below: “7. ………The lower authorities are reading more than what is provided by law. A plain and simple reading of the Act provides that on approval of the research and development facility, expenditure so incurred is eligible for weighted deduction. 8. The Tribunal has considered the submissions made on behalf of the assessee and took the view that section speaks of: (i) development of facility; (ii) incurring of expenditure by the assessee for development of such facility; (iii) approval of the facility by the prescribed authority, which is DSIR; and (iv) allowance of weighted deduction on the expenditure so incurred by the assessee. 9. The provisions nowhere suggest or imply that research and development facility is to be approved from a particular date and, in other words, it is nowhere suggested that date of approval only will be cut-off date for eligibility of weighted deduction on the expenses incurred from that date onwards. A plain reading clearly manifests that the assessee has to develop facility, which presupposes incurring expenditure in this behalf, application to the prescribed authority, who after following proper procedure will approve the facility or otherwise and the assessee will be entitled to weighted deduction of any and all expenditure so incurred. The Tribunal has, therefore, come to the conclusion that on plain reading of section itself, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction on expenditure so incurred by the assessee for development of facility. The Tribunal has also considered Rule 6(5A) and Form No. 3CM and come to the conclusion that a plain and harmonious reading of Rule and Form clearly suggests that once facility is approved, the entire expenditure so incurred on development of 2011:DHC:1161-DB
ITA No.348/2011
Page 5 of 5 R&D facility has to be allowed for weighted deduction as provided by Section 35(2AB). The Tribunal has also considered the legislative intention behind above enactment and observed that to boost up research and development facility in India, the legislature has provided this provision to encourage the development of the facility by providing deduction of weighted expenditure. Since what is stated to be promoted was development of facility, intention of the legislature by making above amendment is very clear that the entire expenditure incurred by the assessee on development of facility, if approved, has to be allowed for the purpose of weighted deduction. 10. We are in full agreement with the reasoning given by the Tribunal and we are of the view that there is no scope for any other interpretation and since the approval is granted during the previous year relevant to the assessment year in question, we are of the view that the assessee is entitled to claim weighted deduction in respect of the entire expenditure incurred under Section 35(2AB) of the Act by the assessee.”
We are in full agreement with the aforesaid approach of the Gujarat High Court. No substantial question of law, therefore, arises. The appeal is dismissed.
A.K. SIKRI, J.
FEBRUARY 24, 2011 M.L. MEHTA, J. Dev
2011:DHC:1161-DB
More judgments on Section 35(2AB)
- Aeon Formulations Private Limited, Chennai vs Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 2(1)…ITA 2481/CHNY/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Devarsons Industries Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The D.C.I.T. Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2327/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Ceat Limited, Mumbai vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 8146/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Forbes Marshall Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs Income Tax Officer Circle 8, PuneITA 3206/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Pochjraja Industries Ltd., Hosur vs ACIT, Circle-1, HosurITA 1072/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026