Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT

327 ITR 305Supreme Court of India2010#1343 most cited

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.

85

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT · 115JB · 80HHC · book profits computation · self-contained code · Minimum Alternate Tax · MAT · export profits deduction · audited financial statements · Explanation 1 to 115JB · 80HHC(1B)

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 153ASection 43BSection 80HHCSection 10(38)Section 139(5)Section 147Section 148
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 32(1)(i)section 80hhc(3)section 80hhcsection 42section 80hhsection 115jasection 43asection 80hsection 153a proceedingsinitial assessment yearenhanced compensationbook profits

Judgments citing Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT, Moradabad vs. M/S Jubliant Organosys Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2596/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

…T 414 (Mumbai) (SB) wherein in para 61 it was held that computation for deduction under section 80HHC needs to be worked out on basis of adjusted book profits for purpose of section 115JB of Act. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court in case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. vs. CIT 327 ITR 305 held that for purpose of section 115JB of Act that 100% export profits are „eligible profits‟ for deduction and same cannot be reduced to 80% by relying on section 80HHC (1B) of Act. Considering aforesaid two propositions, Appellant has recomputed deduction under section 80HHC of Act for purpose of section 115JB of Act to be Rs. 55,184,948. From…

Jubilant Organosys Ltd., Noida vs. Addl. CIT, Moradabad

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2497/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

…T 414 (Mumbai) (SB) wherein in para 61 it was held that computation for deduction under section 80HHC needs to be worked out on basis of adjusted book profits for purpose of section 115JB of Act. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court in case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. vs. CIT 327 ITR 305 held that for purpose of section 115JB of Act that 100% export profits are „eligible profits‟ for deduction and same cannot be reduced to 80% by relying on section 80HHC (1B) of Act. Considering aforesaid two propositions, Appellant has recomputed deduction under section 80HHC of Act for purpose of section 115JB of Act to be Rs. 55,184,948. From…

Vardhman Holdings Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 88/CHANDI/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2018AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Goyal, CIT DR
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 80HSection 80I

…itself for assessment year 2001- 02 in ITA No.249/Chd/2008 dated 28.12.2012 wherein at para 55 the I.T.A.T. had noted that the Ld. DR had conceded A.Y.2003-04 that the issue stood covered in favour of the assessee in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. CIT, 327 ITR 305. 99. In view of the above, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in allowing deduction of 100% of eligible deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act for the purpose of calculation of book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. Ground of appeal No.8 raised by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed. 100. The appeal of the Revenue is there…

ACIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Holdings Ltd., Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 118/CHANDI/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2018AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Goyal, CIT DR
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 80HSection 80I

…itself for assessment year 2001- 02 in ITA No.249/Chd/2008 dated 28.12.2012 wherein at para 55 the I.T.A.T. had noted that the Ld. DR had conceded A.Y.2003-04 that the issue stood covered in favour of the assessee in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. CIT, 327 ITR 305. 99. In view of the above, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in allowing deduction of 100% of eligible deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act for the purpose of calculation of book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. Ground of appeal No.8 raised by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed. 100. The appeal of the Revenue is there…

Asst CIT Cir 6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Ask Investment Managers P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 534/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2012-13 Acit M/S Ask Investment Circle-6(1)(2), Managers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.536, 5Th Floor, 1St Floor Bandbox House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M. K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400030 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aafca2302P Shri Nitin Waghmode-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri J.D. Mistri Sr. Advocate

Section 115JSection 14A

…. The book profit is deemed to be total income of assessee and provides mechanism for computing such book profit and consequential tax liability thereon. He , inter-alia, relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT 327 ITR 305 ii. Section 115JB by a deeming fiction deems book profit as the total income of the assessee, at variance with the income computed under normal provisions of the Act. He relied on the decision in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. (supra) and also on CIT v. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. 327ITR 543 (Delhi) iii. Section 115JB of the Act does not authoriz…

Sanghi Industries Ltd, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 628/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80H

…India Ltd., [320 ITR 561] (SC) that AO cannot reopen an assessment on mere change of opinion. Assessee also contended that the reduction claimed u/s. 115JB was supported by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajantha Pharma Ltd., Vs. CIT [327 ITR 305], wherein the Hon'ble court has stated that the provisions of Section 115JB is a complete code itself and therefore, on the basis of the provisions then existing, assessee has claimed deduction which was allowed. It was contended that the conditions for reopening were not satisfied. 2.2. The AO, however, was of the opinion that deduction u/s. 80…

Epcos India Private Limited, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 11, Kolkata.

In the result, for statistical purpose, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 2439/KOL/2016[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Apr 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2001-02 V/S. Dcit, Circle-11, 6Th Epcos India Pvt. Ltd. Wbids Growth Centre, Floor, Aayakar Kulia, Kanchrapara Road, Bhawan, P-7, P.O. N.S.Santatorium, Chowringhee Square, Kalyanai, Nadia, West Kolkata-69 Bengal-741251 [Pan No.Aaaci 6950 Q] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri S.C. Giri, Ar अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri .K. Srihari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 28-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 20-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Dated 18.10.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-11, Kolkata U/S 251/147/154/143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 12.08.2014 For Assessment Year 2001-02. Shri S.C. Giri, Authorized Representative Appeared On Behalf Of Assessee & Shri P.K. Srihari, Ld. Departmental Representative Appeared On Behalf Of Revenue.

Section 115JSection 251Section 80H

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Judicial Member and Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member Assessment Year :2001-02 V/s. DCIT, Circle-11, 6th EPCOS India Pvt. Ltd. WBIDS Growth Centre, Floor, Aayakar Kulia, Kanchrapara Road, Bhawan, P-7, P.O. N.s.Santatorium, Chowringhee Square, Kalyanai, Nadia, West Kolkata-69 Bengal-741251 [PAN No.AAACI 6950 Q] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri S.C. Giri, AR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri .K. Srihari, CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 28-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Da…

DCIT 10(3), Mumbai vs. Sulzer Pumps India Ltd, Navi Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2418/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. Nos. 2418/M/2014 &1910/M/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit 10(3) बिधम/ M/S. Sulzer Pumps India R.No. 451, 4Th Floor, Limited Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Midc, Thane-Belapur Road, Karv Road, Mumbai-400020 Digha, Navi Mumbai- 400708 C.O. No. 133/M/15(Arising I.T.A. No.2418/M/2014) (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Sulzer Pumps India बिधम/ Dcit 10(3) Limited R.No. 451, 4Th Floor, Vs. Midc, Thane-Belapur Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Digha, Navi Mumbai-400708 Karv Road, Mumbai- 400020 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaack2238F (अपीलाथी/Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी /Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Heena DoshiFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin (DR)
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80Section 80H

…the assessee in view of the amendment in Section 115JB by finance Act 2011 being effective for A.Y. 2005-06 onwards. The matter of controversy prior to amendment has also been adjudicated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Ajanta Pharma Ltd. reported 327 ITR 305 (SC) in favour of the assessee. No distinguishable material has been produced before us. No law and provision contrary to the law relied by the CIT(A) has been produced before us to deviate the finding of the CIT(A) in question. Accordingly, we are of the view that the CIT(A) has decided the matter of controversy judiciously and correctly which i…

Virgo Properties P Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1208/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Srinivasan, Jt. CITFor Respondent: 13.07.2017
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(3)

…e profit and loss account adopted by the company (in its’ annual general meeting) to arrive at the book profit u/s. 115JB. Reference for this may be made to the decisions in Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 273 (SC) and Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 327 ITR 305 (SC). The only thing therefore that needs to be seen in this regard is if the company, in reducing the profit on the sale of shares, has followed any of the specified adjustments under Explanation 1 to s. 115JB. We find that none of the specified adjustments correspond to the said adjustment, made by the assessee to the net profit per the revised…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Virgo Properties Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 741/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.741/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri K.Balasubramanian, AdvocateFor Respondent: 16.05.2017
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…e profit and loss account adopted by the company (in its’ annual general meeting) to arrive at the book profit u/s. 115JB. Reference for this may be made to the decisions in Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 273 (SC) and Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 327 ITR 305 (SC). What, therefore, needs to be seen in this regard is if the Revenue, in 5 Asst. CIT v. Virgo Properties Pvt. Ltd. increasing the profit on the redemption of shares, has followed any of the specified adjustments under Explanation 1 below s. 115JB (2). Clause (b) of the said Explanation prescribes an adjustment by way of an increase (in the…

M/S. Strides Arcolab Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. ITO - 10(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s cross objection is partly allowed

ITA 641/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand
Section 115JSection 35

…issue in favour of the assessee. On a perusal of the order dated 3rd August 2012, in ITA no.6487/Mum./2004, for assessment year 2001–02, it is noticed, the co–ordinate bench following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v/s CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 305 (SC), held as under:– ―17. Last ground of the Revenue’s appeal is against the direction of the learned CIT(A) to reduce export profits based on book profit in the ratio of export turnover to total turnover and not the quantum of deduction as worked out u/s 80HHC for the purposes of working out `book profit’ liable for MAT u/s 115JB of the Act. 1…

United Breweries (Holdings) Ltd., Bangalore vs. CIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 761/BANG/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Apr 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Raom/S.United Breweries (Holdings) Ltd., (Successor To Ub Global Corporation Ltd. On Account Of Amalgamation), Ub Towers, Level12, 14 & 15, Ub City, 24, Vittal Mallya Road, Bangalore-560001. … Appellant Pan:Aaacu2305B Vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bangalore-Iii, Bangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 80H

…of deduction u/s 80HHC on the book profit has to be on the full amount and not 30% of the profits from export of goods. He has further contended that this issue is covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. vs. CIT (327 ITR 305) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that sec.115JB refers to levy of MAT on deemed income and sections 80HHC and 115JB operate in different spheres. Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that section 80HHC(1) refers to Page 5 of 8 eligibility whereas sec.80HHC(3) refers to computation of tax incentive. Sec.115JB is a self-contained code as i…

The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Hq) 2, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7329/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 7329 & 7330/Mum/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06 The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Dy. Cit (H.Q.)-2, Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai बनाम/ Neville House, J. N. Heredia Marg, Vs. Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaact 2328 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : : Shri Yoghesh A. Thar & अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By Shri Fenil Bhatt : Shri Sanjeev Jain ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 28.03.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 07.04.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm: This Is A Set Of Two Appeals By Assessee Are Arising Out Of Separate Orders Of Cit(A)-Iv, Mumbai In Appeal Nos. Cit(A)4/Dc(Hq)-2/It-26/06-07 & Cit(A)4/Addl.Cit-2(1)/It-293/08-09 Both Dated 28.09.2010. Assessments Were Framed Separately By Dcit, (Hq)-2, Mumbai For Ay 2004-05 & Addl. Cit, Range-2(1), Mumbai For Ay 2005-06 Respectively U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Vide His Orders Dated 29.12.2006 & 31.12.2008. 2

Section 143(3)

…book profit there- 6 ITA Nos. 7329 & 7330/M/10 (A.Ys. 04-05 & 05-06) The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (H.Q.) under. The matter in our view stands squarely covered by the decision by the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Ajanta Pharma Ltd. [2010] 327 ITR 305 (SC). We, accordingly, set-aside the matter back to the file of the AO for working the book profit u/s. 115JB in terms of the said decision. We decide accordingly.’ In view of the above, the ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the issue here also needs to be re-examined at the level of the A.O. On query from the Bench, the ld. Sr. DR has no…

Satlej Industries Ltd., Rajasthan vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are deemed to be allowed for statistical purposes with the directions as noted above

ITA 1777/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri G.D. Agarwal, Hon’Blesri C.M.Garg

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Sambhav Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 1BSection 80H

…nal. The ld. Counsel placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. vs. CIT 229 ITR 383(SC) submitted that additional grounds raised on the basis of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajanta Farma Ltd. vs. CIT 327 ITR 305 (SC) which goes to the root of the controversy, therefore, additional ground may kindly be admitted for adjudication. 3. The ld. DR strongly opposed to the admission of additional grounds and contended that when the grounds were not raised before the tribunal in form no. 36 then the same cannot be raised subsequently for filling the gaps in the a…

Satlej Industries Ltd., Rajasthan vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are deemed to be allowed for statistical purposes with the directions as noted above

ITA 1776/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Sri G.D. Agarwal, Hon’Blesri C.M.Garg

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Sambhav Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 1BSection 80H

…nal. The ld. Counsel placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. vs. CIT 229 ITR 383(SC) submitted that additional grounds raised on the basis of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajanta Farma Ltd. vs. CIT 327 ITR 305 (SC) which goes to the root of the controversy, therefore, additional ground may kindly be admitted for adjudication. 3. The ld. DR strongly opposed to the admission of additional grounds and contended that when the grounds were not raised before the tribunal in form no. 36 then the same cannot be raised subsequently for filling the gaps in the a…

J.P. Morgan Services India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (OSD) 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7822/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07 & Assessment Year: 2007-08 J.P. Morgan Services P. Ltd., Dcit (Osd)-8(1) Technopolis Knowledge Park, Mumbai- बनाम/ 3Rd Floor, Mahakali Caves Vs. Road, Chakala Junction, Andheri(E) Mumba-400093 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aabcd0503B

…drew our attention to 3 decisions namely (i)Moser Baer India Ltd. Vs DCIT (2007) 17 SOT 510(Del), (ii) DCIT Vs Roxy Investments (P) ltd (2008) 24 SOT 227 (Del) and (iii) the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd Vs CIT (2010) 327 ITR 305. 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative fairly conceded that the issue stands covered in favour of the assessee. 6. We have carefully perused the orders referred to by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee in the case of Moser Baer India Ltd (Supra) in which it has been held that for determining of Book Profit any mode and manner of computation of tot…

J.P . Morgan Services India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 8987/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07 & Assessment Year: 2007-08 J.P. Morgan Services P. Ltd., Dcit (Osd)-8(1) Technopolis Knowledge Park, Mumbai- बनाम/ 3Rd Floor, Mahakali Caves Vs. Road, Chakala Junction, Andheri(E) Mumba-400093 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aabcd0503B

…drew our attention to 3 decisions namely (i)Moser Baer India Ltd. Vs DCIT (2007) 17 SOT 510(Del), (ii) DCIT Vs Roxy Investments (P) ltd (2008) 24 SOT 227 (Del) and (iii) the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd Vs CIT (2010) 327 ITR 305. 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative fairly conceded that the issue stands covered in favour of the assessee. 6. We have carefully perused the orders referred to by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee in the case of Moser Baer India Ltd (Supra) in which it has been held that for determining of Book Profit any mode and manner of computation of tot…

Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2220/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2002-03

Bench: Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: - 2002-03 The Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. V. Additional Cit 45-47, Somaiya Bhavan, Range 2(1), M.G. Road, Mumbai. Fort, Mumbai – 400 001. Pan/Gir No. Aaact5004A Appellant Respondent

Section 115JSection 41Section 80H

…und no. 5 relates to claim of deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act. 27. At the outset, we find that this ground of claim of deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act has been considered and decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. CIT [2010] 327 ITR 305 (SC). Following observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is relevant. Page 14 of 17 15 Assessment year: - 2002-03 “10. One of the contentions raised on behalf of the Department was that if clause (iv) of Explanation to section 115JB is read in entirety including the last line thereof (which reads as "subject to the conditions specified in that…

Greaves Cotton Ltd (Formerly Known As Greaves Ltd), Mumbai vs. ITO WD 6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7356/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G S Pannu & Shri Amit Shuklaita

For Respondent: Shri N K Chand
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 80H

…o be given from the book profit computed in accordance with the Sec. 115JB of the I.T. Act, 1961. However neither in the Circular No. 680 dated 21.02.1994 of the CBDT not in the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. vs CIT (2010) 327 ITR 305 (SC), it is mentioned that for the purposes, the eligible profit u/s 80HHC is to be worked out based on the book profit as computed in accordance with the Sec 115JB of the Act. The AO’s stand that the profits and gains of the business of the appellant is NIL and hence the appellant is not eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC from the book profit comp…

Kanko Enterprises Limited, Kolkata vs. DIT, Circle - 4, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 68/KOL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kr.Das, JCIT, Sr.DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “B”, KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM] Assessment Year : 2003-04 (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) J.C.I.T., (OSD), Circle-4, -versus- M/s. Kanco Enterprises Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AABCK 3030 G) Assessment Year : 2005-06 M/s. Kanco Enterprises Limited -versus- J.C.I.T.(OSD), Circle-4, Kolkata Kolkata (PAN AABCK 3030 G) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) For the Department : Shri Sanjit Kr.Das, JCIT, Sr.DR For the Assessee : Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA Date of Hearing : 06.10.2015. Date of Pronouncement : 08.10.2015. ORDER Per Shri N.V.Vasudevan,…