Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-15(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S THYROCARE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018–

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No. 7292/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) (Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ita No. 6721/Mum/2025 Ita No. 7293/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax – 15(3)(1), Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400020 Pan : Aabct2577P V/S Thyrocare Technologies Limited, ……………… Respondent D/37, 1 Ttc Industrial Area, Midc, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai - 400703

…be regarded as capital expenditure merely because shares have been allotted to employees. In support of its submission, the assessee placed reliance upon the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT, reported in (2013) 144 ITD 21 (Bangalore - Tribunal) (SB). 12. The AO, vide order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act, disagreed with the submissions of the assessee and held that ESOP expenses are incurred in relation to the grant or issue of shares to employees and are not relatable to profits and gains arising from the business of the assessee com…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-15(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S THYROCARE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018–

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No. 7292/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) (Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ita No. 6721/Mum/2025 Ita No. 7293/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax – 15(3)(1), Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400020 Pan : Aabct2577P V/S Thyrocare Technologies Limited, ……………… Respondent D/37, 1 Ttc Industrial Area, Midc, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai - 400703

…be regarded as capital expenditure merely because shares have been allotted to employees. In support of its submission, the assessee placed reliance upon the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT, reported in (2013) 144 ITD 21 (Bangalore - Tribunal) (SB). 12. The AO, vide order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act, disagreed with the submissions of the assessee and held that ESOP expenses are incurred in relation to the grant or issue of shares to employees and are not relatable to profits and gains arising from the business of the assessee com…

ACIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. THYROCARE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018–

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No. 7292/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) (Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ita No. 6721/Mum/2025 Ita No. 7293/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax – 15(3)(1), Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400020 Pan : Aabct2577P V/S Thyrocare Technologies Limited, ……………… Respondent D/37, 1 Ttc Industrial Area, Midc, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai - 400703

…be regarded as capital expenditure merely because shares have been allotted to employees. In support of its submission, the assessee placed reliance upon the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT, reported in (2013) 144 ITD 21 (Bangalore - Tribunal) (SB). 12. The AO, vide order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act, disagreed with the submissions of the assessee and held that ESOP expenses are incurred in relation to the grant or issue of shares to employees and are not relatable to profits and gains arising from the business of the assessee com…

ACIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. THYROCARE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018–

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No. 7292/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) (Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ita No. 6721/Mum/2025 Ita No. 7293/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax – 15(3)(1), Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400020 Pan : Aabct2577P V/S Thyrocare Technologies Limited, ……………… Respondent D/37, 1 Ttc Industrial Area, Midc, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai - 400703

…be regarded as capital expenditure merely because shares have been allotted to employees. In support of its submission, the assessee placed reliance upon the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT, reported in (2013) 144 ITD 21 (Bangalore - Tribunal) (SB). 12. The AO, vide order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act, disagreed with the submissions of the assessee and held that ESOP expenses are incurred in relation to the grant or issue of shares to employees and are not relatable to profits and gains arising from the business of the assessee com…

ACIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. THYROCARE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018–

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No. 7292/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) (Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ita No. 6721/Mum/2025 Ita No. 7293/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax – 15(3)(1), Room No.460, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, ............... Appellant Mumbai – 400020 Pan : Aabct2577P V/S Thyrocare Technologies Limited, ……………… Respondent D/37, 1 Ttc Industrial Area, Midc, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai - 400703

…be regarded as capital expenditure merely because shares have been allotted to employees. In support of its submission, the assessee placed reliance upon the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT, reported in (2013) 144 ITD 21 (Bangalore - Tribunal) (SB). 12. The AO, vide order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act, disagreed with the submissions of the assessee and held that ESOP expenses are incurred in relation to the grant or issue of shares to employees and are not relatable to profits and gains arising from the business of the assessee com…

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. AVENDUS CAPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22 Dcit-14(1)(1), Mumbai Vs Avendus Capital Private Limited Room No. 432, 4Th Floor, 901, 9Th Floor Platina, Plot No. Aayakar Bhavan, M.L. Road, C-59, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai 400020 Bandra East, Mumbai 400051 Pan: (Aabcc2404Q) Appellant Respondent Present For: Appellant By : Shri Ashish Mehta & Shri Pulkit Pandey, Advocates Respondent By : Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Cit(A) 48, Mumbai Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025-26/1078825129(1) Dated 23.07.2025 Passed Against Assessment Order U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 28.12.2023 For Ay 2021-22. 2. Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: “1. Whether, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Citia) Failed To Appreciate That The Expenditure Incurred On The Esop Scheme Is A Capital Expenditure & Not A Revenue Expenditure

…i) For AY 2011-12 in ITA No. 3475/Mum/2016 (iv) For AY 2016-17 and 2017-18 in ITA No. 1738 and 1739/Mum/2023 3.2. Assessee also contended that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Special Bench in the case of Biocon Limited vs. DCIT [2013] 144 ITD 21 (Bang) (SB). 3.3. Ld. AO after considering the submissions made by the assessee concluded that the amount spent by the assessee and claimed as deduction is for change in capital and hence, a capital expenditure not allowable u/s. 37(1). He also noted in respect of decision of Hon’ble Special Bench in the case of Biocon limited that SLP was filed…

DCIT, MUMBAI vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “E” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, DCIT-2(3)(1), 27 BKC, G Block, 552, 4501/Mum/2025 2022-23 Bandra Kurla Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra (East), Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. [PAN: AAACK4409J] Kotak Mahindra Bank DCIT, Limited, 552, 5th Floor, C-27, G Block, 4829/Mum/2025 2022-23 Aayakar Bhavan, 27 BKC, M.K.Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400020. Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. [PAN: AAACK4409J] For Asse…

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “E” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, DCIT-2(3)(1), 27 BKC, G Block, 552, 4501/Mum/2025 2022-23 Bandra Kurla Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra (East), Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. [PAN: AAACK4409J] Kotak Mahindra Bank DCIT, Limited, 552, 5th Floor, C-27, G Block, 4829/Mum/2025 2022-23 Aayakar Bhavan, 27 BKC, M.K.Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400020. Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. [PAN: AAACK4409J] For Asse…

JCIT (OSD) -3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. STERLITE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeals of both, the Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Sterlite Technologies Limited Principle Commissioner Of E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Income Tax- 27, Vs. Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Navi Mumbai Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Principle Commissioner Of Sterlite Technologies Limited Income Tax- 27, E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Vs. Navi Mumbai Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak Mehta, Cas Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit Dr & Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2023-24/1058725938(1), Dated Sterlite Technologies Ltd. Ay 2016-17 13.12.2023 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Acit, Ltu, Circle- 1, Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 21.12.2018 For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1.1 Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Learned Assessing Officer ('Ao') In Not Allowing The Claim Of Appellant That The Rate Of Ddt In Respect Of Dividend Distributed To Its Overseas Holding Company Ought To Be Restricted To The Rate Of Tax Of 5% Prescribed Under Article 10(2) Of Applicable India- Mauritius Dtaa & That The Appellant Is Eligible For Refund Of Ddt Paid In Excess Of Such Rate.

…excess of ESOP discount, debited in the profit and loss account for which the basis was the decision of Coordinate Bench in assessee's own case for Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2009-10 as well as the decision of Hon'ble Special Bench in the case of Biocon Ltd. 144 ITD 21. However, ld. Assessing Officer disregarded the submissions made and disallowed the claim by making an addition of Rs. 18,80,83,164/- i.e., Rs.13,46,38,862/- computed on the basis of fair valuation method and Rs. 5,34,44,302/- in excess of perquisite value over the ESOP expenditure claimed. 7. In the first appeal, assessee made elaborate submissi…

STERLITE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU CIRCLE 1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of both, the Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Sterlite Technologies Limited Principle Commissioner Of E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Income Tax- 27, Vs. Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Navi Mumbai Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Principle Commissioner Of Sterlite Technologies Limited Income Tax- 27, E-1 Waluj, Midc Industrial Vs. Navi Mumbai Area, Aurangabad - 431136 Maharashtra (Pan: Aaecs8719B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak Mehta, Cas Revenue : Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Cit Dr & Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2023-24/1058725938(1), Dated Sterlite Technologies Ltd. Ay 2016-17 13.12.2023 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Acit, Ltu, Circle- 1, Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 21.12.2018 For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1.1 Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Learned Assessing Officer ('Ao') In Not Allowing The Claim Of Appellant That The Rate Of Ddt In Respect Of Dividend Distributed To Its Overseas Holding Company Ought To Be Restricted To The Rate Of Tax Of 5% Prescribed Under Article 10(2) Of Applicable India- Mauritius Dtaa & That The Appellant Is Eligible For Refund Of Ddt Paid In Excess Of Such Rate.

…excess of ESOP discount, debited in the profit and loss account for which the basis was the decision of Coordinate Bench in assessee's own case for Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2009-10 as well as the decision of Hon'ble Special Bench in the case of Biocon Ltd. 144 ITD 21. However, ld. Assessing Officer disregarded the submissions made and disallowed the claim by making an addition of Rs. 18,80,83,164/- i.e., Rs.13,46,38,862/- computed on the basis of fair valuation method and Rs. 5,34,44,302/- in excess of perquisite value over the ESOP expenditure claimed. 7. In the first appeal, assessee made elaborate submissi…

COLGATE PALMOLIVE (INDIA) LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -6, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Colgate Palmolive (India) vs Principal Commissioner of Limited Income Tax-6, Mumbai Colgate Research Centre, Main Street, Hiranandani Stree, Powai, Mumbai- 400076 PAN:AAACC4309B Appellant Respondent Present for: Appellant by : Shri J D Mistry, Sr. Advocate Respondent by : Shri R A Dhyani, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 06.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29.09.2025 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against t…

DCIT CEN CIR 1(4), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the assessee are partly allowed, and the additional ground of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

…5 has followed the decision in the case assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 2008-09, wherein the Bench allowed ESOP expenditure as a revenue expenditure by following, inter alia, the decision of the Hon’ble Special Bench in the case of Biocon Ltd. vs ACIT 144 ITD 21. The assessee submits that the ESOP expenditure incurred by the assessee has to be allowed as revenue expenditure, as it is nothing but employee remuneration. 29. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Following the decision of the coordinate bench of the ITAT, Mumbai, and respectfully applying the ratio…

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the assessee are partly allowed,\nand the additional ground of the assessee is dismissed

…as followed the decision in the case\nassessee's own case for Assessment Year 2008-09, wherein the Bench allowed\nESOP expenditure as a revenue expenditure by following, inter alia, the decision of\nthe Hon'ble Special Bench in the case of Biocon Ltd. vs ACIT 144 ITD 21. The\nassessee submits that the ESOP expenditure incurred by the assessee has to be\nallowed as revenue expenditure, as it is nothing but employee remuneration.\n\n29. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on\nrecord. Following the decision of the coordinate bench of the ITAT, Mumbai, and\nrespectfully applying the…