JCIT(OSD), CIR-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE (INDIA) LTD, HARYANA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the deduction under Section 80-IC should be allowed on enhanced profits, following CBDT Circular No. 37/2016. It also upheld the deletion of addition on account of provision for expiry of goods, citing Supreme Court judgments.
What were the facts?
The assessee company, engaged in pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, had its income determined at a higher amount than returned due to various additions/disallowances by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) partly confirmed/deleted these additions. The case involves a demerger of a treasury undertaking and a provision for expiry of goods.
What were the issues?
The key issues were whether a demerger qualified for tax benefits and the allowability of a provision for expiry of goods as an expenditure.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 45,Section 2(19AA),Section 115JB,Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 80-IC,Section 2(22)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(9)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. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.968 citing312 ITR 254 · 2009 · SC · Read judgment
- Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT739 citing314 ITR 62 · 2009 · SC
- Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT185 citing98 ITR 167 · 1975 · SC
- 277(D- E) and CIT v. U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation49 citing225 ITR 703 · 1997 · SC
- Wimco Seedlings v. DCIT40 citing107 ITD 267 · 2007 · ITAT
- Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. v. Additional CIT33 citing56 Taxmann.com 415 · 2015 · HC
- CIT v. Shreeram Tech Ltd.7 citing33 Taxmann.com 194 · 2013 · HC
- 317 ITR 2164 citing317 ITR 216
- Executors & Trustees of Sir Cawasji Jehangir v. CIT3 citing35 ITR 537 · 1959 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:
-
These cross appeals filed by the Assessee and the Revenue are directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax
ITA Nos. 1184/Ahd/2018 & 1225/Ahd/2018 Assessee : Reckitt Benckiser Healthc
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 45
- Mukesh Mishra, Thane vs ACIT, Circle 1, ThaneITA 5853/MUM/2026[2020-2021]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2020-2021
- Sip Infotech Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 5355/MUM/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2019-2020
- Rajiv Kumar, Delhi vs DCIT, Circle 67(1), DelhiITA 3538/DEL/2026[2011-12]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2011-12
- DCIT 19 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs Nisha Jhaveri, MumbaiITA 2389/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- Arokiaswamy Velumani, Bengaluru vs Income Tax Officer 15(3)(1), MumbaiITA 1946/MUM/2026[2023-2024]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2023-2024
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026