SYNGENTA INDIA PRIVATE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the ground regarding refund of excess DDT paid, holding that DTAA does not apply when a domestic company pays DDT. It allowed ESOP expenses as allowable expenditure under Section 37(1), following High Court precedents. The additional ground regarding exemption for seed business income was admitted and remitted to the AO for factual verification.
What were the facts?
The assessee company appealed against orders of the CIT(A) concerning various assessment years. Key issues included disallowance of additional depreciation, set-off of losses, deduction under Section 35(1)(iv), education cess, ESOP expenses, and a claim for exemption of seed business income under Section 10(1).
What were the issues?
Whether dividend distribution tax paid by a domestic company is subject to DTAA rates, and whether ESOP expenses are allowable as a deduction. Additionally, whether income from seed business qualifies for exemption as agricultural income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(6)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.
- National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT5,834 citing229 ITR 383 · 1998 · SC
- Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT1,842 citing157 Taxmann 1 · 2006 · SC
- DCIT v. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd.115 citing149 Taxmann.com 332 · 2023 · ITAT
- NTPC v. CIT70 citing97 Taxmann 358 · 1998 · SC
- Ashok Chaganlal Thakkar v. NFAC5 citing159 Taxmann.com 559 · 2024 · HC
- 287 Taxmann 1554 citing287 Taxmann 155 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM &
Heard together (4 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Syngenta India Private Ltd.
Per Bench: These appeals by the assessee are against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi [in short 'the CIT(A)'] dated 04.06.2024 for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16, dated 07.05.2024 for AY 2016-17 & 2018-19 & dated 03.07.2024 for AY 2017-18. 2. The assessee is a private limited company engaged in crop protection business and
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.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Syngenta India Private Ltd, Mumbai vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…Mumbai21 Nov 2024Partly Allowed
The Tribunal dismissed the ground regarding refund of excess DDT paid, holding that DTAA does not apply when a domestic company pays DDT. It allowed ESOP expenses as allowable expenditure under Section 37(1), following H...
- Hcl Technologies Ltd, New Delhi vs ACIT, New DelhiDelhi15 Apr 2026Partly Allowed
The Tribunal restored the issue of sundry creditors to the AO for verification, directing deletion of the addition if the assessee's claim of payment or offering to tax in later years is found correct. The appeals were d...
- Mahua Cooperative Cold Storage Ltd, Mahua… vs ADIT, CPC, BengaluruPatna19 Feb 2026Partly Allowed
The Tribunal held that NCDC is a Public Financial Institution as it is declared as such under Section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956, and thus, the disallowance of interest payable to NCDC under Section 43B was upheld for...
- M/S. Bodal Chemicals Limited, Ahmedabad vs The Dy.CIT., Central Circle-1(1), AhmedabadAhmedabad13 Feb 2026Partly Allowed
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal regarding the disallowance of donation deduction and the denial of Section 80-IA deductions for the effluent treatment plant and steam generation unit. However, the issue of export incen...
- Maharashtra Airport Development Company… vs National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income…Mumbai31 Dec 2025Partly Allowed
The Tribunal held that the grant-in-aid received by the assessee from the State of Maharashtra is not taxable, following its own previous decisions. However, the issue of interest income on fixed deposits was not fully a...
More judgments on Section 35(1)(iv)
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle… vs Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company…ITA 933/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle… vs Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company…ITA 932/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle… vs Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company…ITA 931/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company… vs The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), VadodaraITA 768/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company… vs The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), VadodaraITA 767/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026