Asstt. CIT v. Liva Healthcare Ltd.

161 ITD 63Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2016#6893 most cited
17

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2021.

Also reported as

73 Taxmann.com 171

Judgments citing Asstt. CIT v. Liva Healthcare Ltd.

EVOLUTIS INDIA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - CIRCLE 15(1)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4923/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () M/S Evolutis India Private Asstt. Commissioner Of Limited, C/O Sh Kelkar & Co. Vs. Income Tax, Circle 15(1)(2), Limited, Lbs Marg, Mulund Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, West, Mumbai – 400 080 Mumbai Pan No. Aabce6452C (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Saurabh Bhat, A.R Revenue By : Shri Sumit Kumar, D.R Date Of Hearing : 25/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/09/2021

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Bhat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

…w, thus conclude that the same would not be hit by the Explanation to Sec. 37(1) of the Act.” 12. As regards the reliance placed by the ld. D.R on the order of the ITAT, Mumbai Bench „A‟ in the case of ACIT, Circle 6(3), Mumbai Vs. Liva Healthcare Ltd. (2016) 161 ITD 63 (Mum) is concerned, we find that the Tribunal while disposing off the appeal in the case of Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. ltd.(supra) had considered the said order. Be that as it may, in the case of Liva Healthcare Ltd. (supra), though the Tribunal had incorporated the relevant provisions and clauses of the Indian Medical Council Regulation 2002, ho…

AJANTA PHARMA LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT,CC-7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4785/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.4784 & 4785/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/S Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-Tax-Central Circle 6(2),19Th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (West), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. Pan No. Aaaca5579P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT D.R
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

…dated 01.08.2012, the ld. D.R relied on four judicial pronouncements, viz. Confederation of Indian Pharmaceutical Industry (SSI) Vs. Central Board of Direct taxes (2013) 353 ITR 388 (Himachal Pradesh); ACIT, Circle 6(3), Mumbai Vs. Liva Healthcare Ltd. (2016) 161 ITD 63 (Mum); J.K Panthaki & Co. Vs. ITO (2012) 344 ITR 329 (Kar); and CIT Vs. Gill & Co. (P). Ltd. (2001) 248 ITR 362 (Bom). It was submitted by the ld. D.R that as the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards distributing freebies to the medical practitioners and the doctors was against the public policy, therefore, the same was not allowable as a…

AJANTA PHARMA LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT,CC-7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4784/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.4784 & 4785/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/S Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-Tax-Central Circle 6(2),19Th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (West), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. Pan No. Aaaca5579P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT D.R
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

…dated 01.08.2012, the ld. D.R relied on four judicial pronouncements, viz. Confederation of Indian Pharmaceutical Industry (SSI) Vs. Central Board of Direct taxes (2013) 353 ITR 388 (Himachal Pradesh); ACIT, Circle 6(3), Mumbai Vs. Liva Healthcare Ltd. (2016) 161 ITD 63 (Mum); J.K Panthaki & Co. Vs. ITO (2012) 344 ITR 329 (Kar); and CIT Vs. Gill & Co. (P). Ltd. (2001) 248 ITR 362 (Bom). It was submitted by the ld. D.R that as the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards distributing freebies to the medical practitioners and the doctors was against the public policy, therefore, the same was not allowable as a…

M/S.SRL DIAGNOSTICS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX-7, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the grounds raised by assessee are allowed

ITA 1528/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri R. L. Negi, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1528/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan & Shri SFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan, DR
Section 14ASection 263Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM & SHRI R. L. NEGI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1528/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) PCIT-7, M/s SRL Diagnostics Pvt. Room No. 315, 3rd floor, Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. बिधम/ Piramal Tower, Annexe, Road, Mumbai-400 020 Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Vs. Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AAACT9117E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : Shri V. Sridharan & Shri S. Sriram, ARs by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Anand Mohan, DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 18.11.2020 D…

MEDLEY PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY.C.I.T., CENT.CIR.10(2)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2344/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income D-2, Medley Houses, 16Th Road, Tax-10(2)(2), Vs. Midc Area, Andheri (East), Mumbai Mumbai – 400 093 Pan – Aaacm2764J (Appellant) (Respondent) Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, D-2, Medley House, 16Th Road, Central Circle – 44, Vs. Midc Area, Andheri (East), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai Mumbai Pan – Aaacm2764J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jothwani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri. H.N. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147

….R on the order of the ITAT, Chennai bench „C‟ in the case of TTK Healthcare Limited Vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai (2017) 78 Taxman.com 86 (Chennai) and ITAT, Mumbai Bench „A‟ in the case of ACIT, Circle 6(3), Mumbai Vs. Liva Healthcare Ltd. (2016) 161 ITD 63 (Mum). In the backdrop of his aforesaid submissions, it was the claim of the ld. D.R that as the A.O had validly assumed jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act, therefore, the claim of the counsel for the assessee did not merit acceptance and was liable to be rejected. 8. Rebutting the reliance placed by the revenue on the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Co…

AJANTA PHARMA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6883/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Madhur Aggarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Satishchandra Rajore, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 274r

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर ससिंह, न्याययक सदस्य एविं श्री मनोज कुमार अग्रवाल, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सुं./ ITA No. 6883/Mum/2016 (यनर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) Ajanta Pharma Limited The Dy. Commissioner of 98, Govt. Industrial Area, Income Tax, Central Hindustan Naka Charkop, Vs. Circle-7(2), Aayakar Kandivali (W), Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./PAN No. AAACA5579P अपीला…

SHRI VASANT VASHRAMBHAI SAPOVADIA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMR. INCOME TAX,CIR-3,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 32/RJT/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Das, DR
Section 69C

…DCIT reported in 85 taxmann.com 354. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced as under: “We have heard both the parties. Mr. Soparkar is very fair in pointing out at the outset that this tribunal's decision in Asstt. CIT v. Liva Healthcare Ltd. [2016] 161 ITD 63/73taxmann.com 171 (Mum. - Trib.) upholding such a disallowance in case of pharmaceutical companies offering free samples to doctor post introduction of the relevant product in market after establishing end use; is hit by Section 37(1) explanation. He however refers to another co-ordinate bench decision in Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Addl. CIT…

M/S. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICLAS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2458/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2010-11 Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Dcit, Cir.4(1)(2) Commerce House Vs. Ahmedabad. Opp: Rajvansh Apartment Judges Bungalow Road Ahmedabad 380 015 Pan : Aabct 0228 K

For Respondent: Shri Kishan Vyas, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

…y and M/s.Unicure Remedies P.Ltd. Vs. ACIT, (one of us i.e. Accountant Member is party to the decision). He further contended that in the case of Cadilan Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra) took note of decision in the case of ACIT Vs. Liva Healthcare Ltd., 161 ITD 63(Mum) wherein such disallowance in the case of pharmaceutical companies was upheld. However, thereafter the Bench has observed that in subsequent decisions viz. Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. ACIT, 161 ITD 291 (Mum) and DCIT Vs. PHL Pharma P.Ltd., 184 TTJ 1 (Mum), ITAT has held that Board Circular dated 1.8.2012 cannot be applied with retrospect…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LA RENON HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 3327/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Jayant Jhaveri, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…3.2.9 In view of the discussion as above, the objection raised by the assessee is rejected.' 28. We have heard both the parties. Mr. Soparkar is very fair in pointing out at the outset that this tribunal's decision in Asstt. CIT v. Liva Healthcare Ltd. [2016] 161 ITD 63/73 taxmann.com 171 (Mum. - Trib.) upholding such a disallowance in case of pharmaceutical companies offering free samples to doctor post introduction of the relevant product in market after establishing end use; is hit by Section 37(1) explanation. He however refers to another co- ordinate bench decision in Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Addl. C…

THE DY. CIT, (OSD)-I, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. LA RENON HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 2380/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Jayant Jhaveri, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…3.2.9 In view of the discussion as above, the objection raised by the assessee is rejected.' 28. We have heard both the parties. Mr. Soparkar is very fair in pointing out at the outset that this tribunal's decision in Asstt. CIT v. Liva Healthcare Ltd. [2016] 161 ITD 63/73 taxmann.com 171 (Mum. - Trib.) upholding such a disallowance in case of pharmaceutical companies offering free samples to doctor post introduction of the relevant product in market after establishing end use; is hit by Section 37(1) explanation. He however refers to another co- ordinate bench decision in Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Addl. C…

PFIZER LTD.,MUMBAI vs. JT. CIT - 14(2) (ERSTWHILE ADDL. CIT. RANGE 8(2)), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 4826/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala &For Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…that the expenditure incurred by the assessee is in violation of the IMC Regulation and, therefore, the same is required to be disallowed. The learned DR further relied on the order of the co-ordinate bench in the case of ACIT vs. Liva Healthcare Ltd. [2016] 161 ITD 63 (Mumbai- Trib) wherein it was held that the expenditure incurred by the Pharmaceutical companies on overseas tours of Doctors to increase their sales and profitability was not an allowable expenditure as oversea trip were directed towards leisure and entertainment of Doctors and their spouses rather than being directed towards seminar for product…

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-1,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 929/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR
Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Assessment Appeal(s) by Nos. Year (s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 922/Ahd/17 2010-11 The DCIT Sun Pharmaceuticals Circle-2(1)(1) Industries Ltd. Baroda SPARC, Tandalja Baroda PAN:AADCS 3124 K (Revenue) (Assessee) 2. 929/Ahd/17 2010-11 Assessee Revenue 3. 1234/Ahd/17 2012-13 Revenue Assessee 4. 1237/Ahd/17 2012-13 Assessee Revenue Revenue by : Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR Assessee by : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin S…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 922/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR
Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Assessment Appeal(s) by Nos. Year (s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 922/Ahd/17 2010-11 The DCIT Sun Pharmaceuticals Circle-2(1)(1) Industries Ltd. Baroda SPARC, Tandalja Baroda PAN:AADCS 3124 K (Revenue) (Assessee) 2. 929/Ahd/17 2010-11 Assessee Revenue 3. 1234/Ahd/17 2012-13 Revenue Assessee 4. 1237/Ahd/17 2012-13 Assessee Revenue Revenue by : Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR Assessee by : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin S…

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1237/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR
Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Assessment Appeal(s) by Nos. Year (s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 922/Ahd/17 2010-11 The DCIT Sun Pharmaceuticals Circle-2(1)(1) Industries Ltd. Baroda SPARC, Tandalja Baroda PAN:AADCS 3124 K (Revenue) (Assessee) 2. 929/Ahd/17 2010-11 Assessee Revenue 3. 1234/Ahd/17 2012-13 Revenue Assessee 4. 1237/Ahd/17 2012-13 Assessee Revenue Revenue by : Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR Assessee by : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin S…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1234/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin Shah, ArsFor Respondent: Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR
Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Assessment Appeal(s) by Nos. Year (s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 922/Ahd/17 2010-11 The DCIT Sun Pharmaceuticals Circle-2(1)(1) Industries Ltd. Baroda SPARC, Tandalja Baroda PAN:AADCS 3124 K (Revenue) (Assessee) 2. 929/Ahd/17 2010-11 Assessee Revenue 3. 1234/Ahd/17 2012-13 Revenue Assessee 4. 1237/Ahd/17 2012-13 Assessee Revenue Revenue by : Shri N.R. Soni, CIT-DR Assessee by : Shri S.N.Soparkar, Shri Vartik Chokshi and Shri Parin S…

ICPA HEALTH PRODUCTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 10(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6244/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhita No.6245/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year- 2013-14) Icpa Health Products Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of Off. 216-219,Adarsh Income Tax, Circle-10(1)(1), Industrial Estate, Sahar Mumbai, Road, Chakala, Andheri(E), Vs. Room No. 702, C-10, Mumbai-400099 Praytaksha Kar Bhavan, Pan: Aaac13042F Bkc, Mumbai-400051 (Appellant) ( Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Yogesh Thar Ar Revenue By : Sh. V. Justine Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.04.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. These Two Appeals By Assessee Under Section 253 Of Income Tax Act Are Directed Against The Separate Order Of Commissioner (Appeals)-17

For Appellant: Sh. Yogesh Thar ARFor Respondent: Sh. V. Justine Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)Section 37Section 37(1)

…ation is not applicable to the assessee before the AO, the same cannot be applied blindly. 12. At the time of hearing, our attention was also drawn to the decision of Tribunal of our Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Asstt. CIT v. 'Liva Healthcare Ltd. [2016] 161 ITD 63/73 taxmann.com 171. In counter, to this decision the learned counsel, Shri JD Mistry distinguished the said judgment and submitted that the facts of the case in the Liva Healthcare (supra) were substantially different from the facts of the present case. In the case of Liva Healthcare (supra), the Hon'ble Tribunal disallowed such expenses u/s. 37(1…

BAYER PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD.,THANE vs. DCIT RANGE 4(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2880/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Jigar SaiyaFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal-DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 37(2)Section 7

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “सी मुंबई सी सी” खंडपीठ सी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मेमेमेमे खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“C”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं अमरजीत "सह, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amarjit Singh,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./2880/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/s. Bayer Pharmaceuticals Private DCIT – Range-4(1) Limited,Bayer House, Central Avenue, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Hiranandani Estate, Thane-400 607 Mumbai-400 020. PAN:AABCB 3852 F…