What is Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Section 115JB is a self-contained code for computing book profit, which relies on audited financial statements subject to adjustments under Explanation 1. Restrictions on export profit deductions under Section 80HHC(1B) for normal tax computation do not automatically apply when computing book profits under Section 115JB.

How many judgments cite Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT?

84 judgments on BharatTax cite Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT (327 ITR 305), spanning 2011 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115JB, Section 153A, Section 43B, Section 80HHC, Section 10(38), Section 139(5).

Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT (327 ITR 305)

M/S GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT,, NEW DELHI

ITA 2539/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bhopal Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 92C

…f Rs.13,30,97,070 being eligible for deduction sub-section (3)/(3A) of section 80HHC of the Act. 33. The ld. A.R. for the assessee submitted that this issue stands covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd vs. CIT: 327 ITR 305, wherein the Court has held that provisions of section 115JB of the Act is a self-contained code and consequently ‘book profit’under that section has to be ITA Nos.4859/Del/2009; ITA Nos.157 to 159, 4791, 4856 & 5358/Del/2010 & ITA No.2539/Del/2017 Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi Page 20 of 66 computed on the basis of net profit as shown in th…

GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 159/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 92C

…f Rs.13,30,97,070 being eligible for deduction sub-section (3)/(3A) of section 80HHC of the Act. 33. The ld. A.R. for the assessee submitted that this issue stands covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd vs. CIT: 327 ITR 305, wherein the Court has held that provisions of section 115JB of the Act is a self-contained code and consequently ‘book profit’under that section has to be computed on the basis of net profit as shown in the audited financial statements, subject to various upward and downward adjustments as required to be made in terms of various clauses given in…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI vs. UFLEX LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 2196/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 1726/Del/2017: Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1566/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 1567/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 1568/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Uflex Ltd., Vs Acit, 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27, Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Ita No. 2194/Del/2018: Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2195/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2196/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Uflex Ltd., 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27 (Erstwhile Central Circle-18), Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv., Sh. Shivam Malik, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Instant Batch Of Seven Appeals Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Namely, M/S Uflex Ltd. All Other Relevant Details Thereof Stand Tabulated As Under: Uflex Ltd. Sl.

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ion u/s 80HHC to the extent of profits under clause (a) or clause( c) of sub-section (3) of section 80HHC of Rs. 13,14,61,417/- while computing Book profits u/s 115JB based on the ratio of judgment by Hon,ble Supreme court in Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 327 ITR 305(SC). 11. The lower authorities are wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing the claim of deduction u/s 80HHC without applying the sun -set clause specified in sub - section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act. 12. The lower authorities were wrong on facts and bad in law in rejecting the claim of appellant for a sum of Rs. 3,00,66,362/- on accou…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI vs. UFLEX LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 2195/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 1726/Del/2017: Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1566/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 1567/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 1568/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Uflex Ltd., Vs Acit, 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27, Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Ita No. 2194/Del/2018: Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2195/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2196/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Uflex Ltd., 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27 (Erstwhile Central Circle-18), Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv., Sh. Shivam Malik, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Instant Batch Of Seven Appeals Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Namely, M/S Uflex Ltd. All Other Relevant Details Thereof Stand Tabulated As Under: Uflex Ltd. Sl.

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ion u/s 80HHC to the extent of profits under clause (a) or clause( c) of sub-section (3) of section 80HHC of Rs. 13,14,61,417/- while computing Book profits u/s 115JB based on the ratio of judgment by Hon,ble Supreme court in Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 327 ITR 305(SC). 11. The lower authorities are wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing the claim of deduction u/s 80HHC without applying the sun -set clause specified in sub - section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act. 12. The lower authorities were wrong on facts and bad in law in rejecting the claim of appellant for a sum of Rs. 3,00,66,362/- on accou…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI vs. UFLEX LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 2194/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 1726/Del/2017: Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1566/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 1567/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 1568/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Uflex Ltd., Vs Acit, 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27, Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Ita No. 2194/Del/2018: Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2195/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2196/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Uflex Ltd., 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27 (Erstwhile Central Circle-18), Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv., Sh. Shivam Malik, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Instant Batch Of Seven Appeals Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Namely, M/S Uflex Ltd. All Other Relevant Details Thereof Stand Tabulated As Under: Uflex Ltd. Sl.

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ion u/s 80HHC to the extent of profits under clause (a) or clause( c) of sub-section (3) of section 80HHC of Rs. 13,14,61,417/- while computing Book profits u/s 115JB based on the ratio of judgment by Hon,ble Supreme court in Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 327 ITR 305(SC). 11. The lower authorities are wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing the claim of deduction u/s 80HHC without applying the sun -set clause specified in sub - section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act. 12. The lower authorities were wrong on facts and bad in law in rejecting the claim of appellant for a sum of Rs. 3,00,66,362/- on accou…

UFLEX LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI

ITA 1568/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 1726/Del/2017: Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1566/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 1567/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 1568/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Uflex Ltd., Vs Acit, 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27, Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Ita No. 2194/Del/2018: Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2195/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2196/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Uflex Ltd., 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27 (Erstwhile Central Circle-18), Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv., Sh. Shivam Malik, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Instant Batch Of Seven Appeals Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Namely, M/S Uflex Ltd. All Other Relevant Details Thereof Stand Tabulated As Under: Uflex Ltd. Sl.

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ion u/s 80HHC to the extent of profits under clause (a) or clause( c) of sub-section (3) of section 80HHC of Rs. 13,14,61,417/- while computing Book profits u/s 115JB based on the ratio of judgment by Hon,ble Supreme court in Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 327 ITR 305(SC). 11. The lower authorities are wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing the claim of deduction u/s 80HHC without applying the sun -set clause specified in sub - section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act. 12. The lower authorities were wrong on facts and bad in law in rejecting the claim of appellant for a sum of Rs. 3,00,66,362/- on accou…

UFLEX LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI

ITA 1567/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 1726/Del/2017: Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1566/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 1567/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 1568/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Uflex Ltd., Vs Acit, 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27, Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Ita No. 2194/Del/2018: Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2195/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2196/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Uflex Ltd., 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27 (Erstwhile Central Circle-18), Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv., Sh. Shivam Malik, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Instant Batch Of Seven Appeals Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Namely, M/S Uflex Ltd. All Other Relevant Details Thereof Stand Tabulated As Under: Uflex Ltd. Sl.

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ion u/s 80HHC to the extent of profits under clause (a) or clause( c) of sub-section (3) of section 80HHC of Rs. 13,14,61,417/- while computing Book profits u/s 115JB based on the ratio of judgment by Hon,ble Supreme court in Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 327 ITR 305(SC). 11. The lower authorities are wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing the claim of deduction u/s 80HHC without applying the sun -set clause specified in sub - section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act. 12. The lower authorities were wrong on facts and bad in law in rejecting the claim of appellant for a sum of Rs. 3,00,66,362/- on accou…

UFLEX LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27 , NEW DELHI

ITA 1566/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 1726/Del/2017: Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1566/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 1567/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 1568/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Uflex Ltd., Vs Acit, 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27, Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Ita No. 2194/Del/2018: Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2195/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2196/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Uflex Ltd., 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27 (Erstwhile Central Circle-18), Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv., Sh. Shivam Malik, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Instant Batch Of Seven Appeals Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Namely, M/S Uflex Ltd. All Other Relevant Details Thereof Stand Tabulated As Under: Uflex Ltd. Sl.

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ion u/s 80HHC to the extent of profits under clause (a) or clause( c) of sub-section (3) of section 80HHC of Rs. 13,14,61,417/- while computing Book profits u/s 115JB based on the ratio of judgment by Hon,ble Supreme court in Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 327 ITR 305(SC). 11. The lower authorities are wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing the claim of deduction u/s 80HHC without applying the sun -set clause specified in sub - section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act. 12. The lower authorities were wrong on facts and bad in law in rejecting the claim of appellant for a sum of Rs. 3,00,66,362/- on accou…

UFLEX LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT,, NEW DELHI

ITA 1726/DEL/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 1726/Del/2017: Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Ita No. 1566/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 1567/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 1568/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Uflex Ltd., Vs Acit, 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27, Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Ita No. 2194/Del/2018: Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 2195/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2196/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Acit, Vs Uflex Ltd., 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-27 (Erstwhile Central Circle-18), Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacf0109J Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv., Sh. Shivam Malik, Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Instant Batch Of Seven Appeals Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Namely, M/S Uflex Ltd. All Other Relevant Details Thereof Stand Tabulated As Under: Uflex Ltd. Sl.

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ion u/s 80HHC to the extent of profits under clause (a) or clause( c) of sub-section (3) of section 80HHC of Rs. 13,14,61,417/- while computing Book profits u/s 115JB based on the ratio of judgment by Hon,ble Supreme court in Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010) 327 ITR 305(SC). 11. The lower authorities are wrong on facts and bad in law in not allowing the claim of deduction u/s 80HHC without applying the sun -set clause specified in sub - section (1B) of section 80HHC of the Act. 12. The lower authorities were wrong on facts and bad in law in rejecting the claim of appellant for a sum of Rs. 3,00,66,362/- on accou…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1717/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad07 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang, Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.K. ChaitanyaFor Respondent: Smt. Mamata Choudhary

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…ing of audit report under Section 80IA(7) because the said provision is a compliance condition and not condition precedent for claiming a deduction. In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd Vs. CIT reported in (2010) 327 ITR 305 (SC). He further referring to the decision in the case of Wipro Ltd (supra) submitted that the Court has made a clear distinction between exemption provisions and deduction provisions contained in Chapter VI-A. In Para 11, the Court has also not doubted or upset the ratio of GM Knitting's case (supra), but has only distinguished it on the count t…