Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT

35 Taxmann.com 335Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#240 most cited

What is Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

The discount arising from the grant of Employee Stock Option Plans (ESOPs) is an allowable business expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as it is an ascertained liability, not a contingent one, and constitutes a revenue expense rather than a capital expense.

322

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT · ESOP discount deduction · Employee Stock Option Plan expenditure · Section 37(1) deduction · business expenditure · revenue expenditure · contingent liability · capital expenditure · ITAT Special Bench · 144 ITD 21

Also reported as

144 ITD 21155 TTJ 64925 ITR (Trib) 602

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 40A(2)(b)Section 115JBSection 8DSection 144B

Issues it is cited on

section 2(15a)section 17(2)(iiia)section 50(1)section 17(2)section 80absection 54esection 80msection 10(15)section 10(33)section 14a(1)section 36(1)(viii)section 54ec

Judgments citing Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Religare Securities Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessees is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 574/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Religare Securities Ltd., Vs Dcit, 6Th Floor, Prius Global, Circle-21(1), A-3, 4, 5, Plot No.11, Sector-125, Cr Building, Noida. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacf1952D Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs Religare Securities Ltd., Circle-21(1), . D-3, P-3B, District Centre, Cr Building, Saket, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacf1952D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate & Ms Tejasvi Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The Second One Is Filed By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 11.11.2016 Of The Cit(A)-7, New Delhi, For A.Y. 2011-12. Itas No.230 & 574/Del/2017

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 37(1)

…commodities Ltd for assessment year 2008 - 09 identical issue arose before the coordinate bench, ITAs No.230 & 574/Del/2017 which decided this issue in ITA No. 2283/Del/2013 by order dated 04/01/2017 wherein relying upon the decision of the special bench in 144 ITD 21 claim of the assessee with respect to the above disallowance were allowed vide para No. 7 of that order. The coordinate bench in para No. 8 also held that the issue is also squarely covered by the decision of the Hon‟ble Madras High Court in 211 Taxman 554 wherein it has been held that the above expenditure on account of employee stock option sche…

M/S. Religare Enterprise Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessees is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 230/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Religare Securities Ltd., Vs Dcit, 6Th Floor, Prius Global, Circle-21(1), A-3, 4, 5, Plot No.11, Sector-125, Cr Building, Noida. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacf1952D Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs Religare Securities Ltd., Circle-21(1), . D-3, P-3B, District Centre, Cr Building, Saket, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacf1952D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate & Ms Tejasvi Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The Second One Is Filed By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 11.11.2016 Of The Cit(A)-7, New Delhi, For A.Y. 2011-12. Itas No.230 & 574/Del/2017

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 37(1)

…commodities Ltd for assessment year 2008 - 09 identical issue arose before the coordinate bench, ITAs No.230 & 574/Del/2017 which decided this issue in ITA No. 2283/Del/2013 by order dated 04/01/2017 wherein relying upon the decision of the special bench in 144 ITD 21 claim of the assessee with respect to the above disallowance were allowed vide para No. 7 of that order. The coordinate bench in para No. 8 also held that the issue is also squarely covered by the decision of the Hon‟ble Madras High Court in 211 Taxman 554 wherein it has been held that the above expenditure on account of employee stock option sche…

Trent Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl. C.I.T.-2(3), Mumbai

ITA 5775/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Trent Ltd., V. Add. Cit – 2(3) Bombay House, 2Nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacl1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Cit – 2(3) V. M/S. Trent Ltd., Room No. 556, 5Th Floor Bombay House, 2Nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai - 400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacl1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Trent Ltd., V. Dy. Cit – 2(3) Bombay House, 2Nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacl1838J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 35DSection 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Trent Ltd., v. Add. CIT – 2(3) Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. CIT – 2(3) v. M/s. Trent Ltd., Room No. 556, 5th Floor Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai - 400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Trent Ltd., v. Dy. CIT – 2(3) Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24 Aa…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3996/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishinew Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. Acit, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), Iii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153Section 40Section 92C(2)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―I-2‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER New Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. ACIT, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), III, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAACN0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-III, New Delhi PAN: AAACN0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sachit Jolly, Adv Shri Rohit Garg, Adv Shri Siddharth Joshi, Adv Revenue by: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing Multiples dates and last h…

M/S. New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 3865/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishinew Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. Acit, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), Iii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153Section 40Section 92C(2)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―I-2‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER New Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. ACIT, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), III, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAACN0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-III, New Delhi PAN: AAACN0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sachit Jolly, Adv Shri Rohit Garg, Adv Shri Siddharth Joshi, Adv Revenue by: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing Multiples dates and last h…

DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Magma Fincorp Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1503/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

…1 Magma Fincorp Ltd. AY 2014-15 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/and "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No. 1503/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Magma Fincorp Limited Circle-8(1), Kolkata. (PAN: AABCM9445K) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 29.01.2020 Date of Pronouncement 28.02.2020 For the Appellant Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR For the Respondent Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA ORDER Per Shri A…

Salzer Electronics Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward - 4, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1858/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. Manoj Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1858/CHNY/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2016-2017. M/s. Salzer Electronics Ltd, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.1, Samichettipalayam Post, Corporate Ward 4, Jothipuram Via, Coimbatore Coimbatore 641 047. [PAN AAECS 3411L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 6 (2), Chennai vs. M/S Solarwinds India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2079/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Feb 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2079/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Vs M/S. Solar Winds India Pvt. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., Corporate Circle – 6(2), No.16, Iii Floor, Rms Apartment, Chennai. No.12, Gopalakrishna Street, Pondy Bazaar, T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aacct4499H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Ramakrishnan, Cit

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bagmar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Ramakrishnan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…ved by the assessment order, an appeal was preferred before Ld.CIT(A), who vide impugned order allowed the appeal treating as ESOP expenditure by placing reliance on the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Biocon Ltd., vs. DCIT (LTU), 35 Taxmann.com 335 and the Hon’ble Judicial Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. PVP Ventures Limited, 23 Taxmann.com 286. Being aggrieved by the decision of the CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before us challenging the correctness of the findings of the Ld.CIT(A). 4 I.T.A. No. 2079/Chny/2019 4. The Ld.DR vehemently submitted that the true nature of the…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 3644/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla &For Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma, CIT-DR&
Section 143(3)Section 147

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, उपाध्यक्ष एविं श्री जी. मिंजुनाथ लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND SRI G MANJUNATHA, AM आयकर अपील सुं./ ITA No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank of India The Dy. Commissioner of 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./PAN No. AAACS8577K आयकर अपील सुं./ ITA No. 4563/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessmen…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(3)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Nova Medical Centres Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3429/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Assessment Year : 2013 – 14 M/S Nova Medical Centers Pvt. Ltd., No. 128, 5Th Floor, Golden Towers, Old Airport Road, Dcit, Circle – 2 (3) (1), Vs. Behind Hdfc Bank, Kodihalli, Bangalore Bangalore – 560017. Pan: Aaccn9242N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.01.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.01.2020 O R D E R Per Shri A.K. Garodia, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue & It Is Directed Against The Order Of Cit(A) – 2 Bengaluru Dated 31.10.2018 For A. Y. 2013 – 14. 2. Only One Ground Is Raised By The Revenue As Per Which The Grievance Of Revenue Is About Deletion Of The Addition Of Rs. 722,20,450/- Made By The A. O. On Account Of Cost Of Employees Shares Based Payments (Esop) Expenses. 3. In Course Of Hearing, Learned Dr Of The Revenue Supported The Assessment Order & He Filed Written Submissions Also In Which, This Is The Main Argument That Learned Cit (A) Has Followed A Tribunal Order Passed By Special Bench Of The Tribunal Rendered In The Case Of Biocon Limited Vs. Dcit, 144 Itd 21 But The

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT DR

…of the revenue supported the assessment order and he filed written submissions also in which, this is the main argument that learned CIT (A) has followed a tribunal order passed by special bench of the tribunal rendered in the case of Biocon Limited vs. DCIT, 144 ITD 21 but the ITA Nos.3429(B)/2018 Page 2 of 3 department has gone for an appeal before Hon’ble Karnataka High Court against this tribunal order and the issue has not reached finality. Learned AR of the assessee supported the order of CIT (A) and she placed reliance on the following Judicial Pronouncements in addition to the order of the special bench o…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Info Edge India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 2968/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Info Edge India Ltd, Circle-12(1), Gf-12A, 94, Meghdoot New Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan: Aaaci1838D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 14Section 143Section 145Section 14ASection 37

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT, Vs. Info Edge India Ltd, Circle-12(1), GF-12A, 94, Meghdoot New Delhi Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi PAN: AAACI1838D (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR Assessee by: Shri Deepesh Jain, CA Date of Hearing 10/10/2019 Date of pronouncement 08/01/2020 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by Ld AO against the order of the ld CIT(A)-18, New Delhi dated 23.02.2017 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The AO has…

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5708/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 144Section 153Section 32Section 37Section 40

…s 37(1) of the Act. In this regard reliance was placed on the following decisions:- [i] CIT vs M/s PVP Ventures Ltd. 211 Taxman 554 (Madras High Court); [ii] CIT vs Lemon Tree Hotels Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 26 (Delhi High Court); and [iii] Biocon Limited vs DCIT 155 TTJ 649 (Banglore) (Special Bench) 110. It was also pointed out that the Assessing Officer has placed reliance on the decision of Special Bench but u/s 192 r.w.s 17(2), when the option is exercised by the employee, then tax is to be deducted at source. 111. The Ld.DR for the Revenue placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer and DRP with speci…

M/S. Religare Securities Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed in terms of our directions contained in the preceding

ITA 2282/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 28Section 36Section 36(1)(ii)Section 37(1)

…f the group companies, Religare commodities Ltd. for assessment year 2008-09 identical issue arose before the coordinate bench, which decided this issue in ITA No. 2283/Del/2013 by order dated 4.1.2017 wherein relying upon the decision of the special bench in 144 ITD 21 claim of the assessee with respect to the above disallowance were allowed vide para No. 7 of that order. The coordinate bench in para No. 8 also held that the issue is also squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in 211 Taxman 554 wherein it has been held that the above expenditure on account of employee stock option sche…

Goldman Sachs (India) Securities Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir 7 (1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7207/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Vikas Awasthygoldman Sachs (India) Securities Pvt. Ltd. 951-A, Rational House, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai 400 025. Pan:Aafca6819F ...... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri.Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 271(1)(c)

…um/2012 decided on 22/7/2016. The ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee pointed that Tribunal while adjudicating the issue of ESOP Cost in favour of the assessee has placed reliance on the decision of Special Bench in the case of Biocon Ltd. vs. DCIT, 144 ITD 21(Bang). While deciding the issue of payments made to Stock Exchange for non-compliance of clearing house trades, client code modification, etc. reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Angel Capital & Debit Market Ltd. in Income Tax Appeal No.[L] 475 of 2011. The ld. Authorized Representative of the a…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi vs. Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5026/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…37(1) of the Act. In this regard reliance was placed on the following decisions:- [i] CIT vs M/s PVP Ventures Ltd. 211 Taxman 554 (Madras High Court); [ii] CIT vs Lemon Tree Hotels Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 26 (Delhi High Court); and [iii] Biocon Limited vs DCIT 155 TTJ 649 (Banglore) (Special Bench) 110. It was also pointed out that the Assessing Officer has placed reliance on the decision of Special Bench but u/s 192 r.w.s 17(2), when the option is exercised by the employee, then tax is to be deducted at source. 111. The Ld.DR for the Revenue placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer and DRP with s…

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4913/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…37(1) of the Act. In this regard reliance was placed on the following decisions:- [i] CIT vs M/s PVP Ventures Ltd. 211 Taxman 554 (Madras High Court); [ii] CIT vs Lemon Tree Hotels Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 26 (Delhi High Court); and [iii] Biocon Limited vs DCIT 155 TTJ 649 (Banglore) (Special Bench) 110. It was also pointed out that the Assessing Officer has placed reliance on the decision of Special Bench but u/s 192 r.w.s 17(2), when the option is exercised by the employee, then tax is to be deducted at source. 111. The Ld.DR for the Revenue placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer and DRP with s…

M/S. Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1944/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…37(1) of the Act. In this regard reliance was placed on the following decisions:- [i] CIT vs M/s PVP Ventures Ltd. 211 Taxman 554 (Madras High Court); [ii] CIT vs Lemon Tree Hotels Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 26 (Delhi High Court); and [iii] Biocon Limited vs DCIT 155 TTJ 649 (Banglore) (Special Bench) 110. It was also pointed out that the Assessing Officer has placed reliance on the decision of Special Bench but u/s 192 r.w.s 17(2), when the option is exercised by the employee, then tax is to be deducted at source. 111. The Ld.DR for the Revenue placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer and DRP with s…

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7637/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…37(1) of the Act. In this regard reliance was placed on the following decisions:- [i] CIT vs M/s PVP Ventures Ltd. 211 Taxman 554 (Madras High Court); [ii] CIT vs Lemon Tree Hotels Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 26 (Delhi High Court); and [iii] Biocon Limited vs DCIT 155 TTJ 649 (Banglore) (Special Bench) 110. It was also pointed out that the Assessing Officer has placed reliance on the decision of Special Bench but u/s 192 r.w.s 17(2), when the option is exercised by the employee, then tax is to be deducted at source. 111. The Ld.DR for the Revenue placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer and DRP with s…

Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Special Range- 1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7112/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…37(1) of the Act. In this regard reliance was placed on the following decisions:- [i] CIT vs M/s PVP Ventures Ltd. 211 Taxman 554 (Madras High Court); [ii] CIT vs Lemon Tree Hotels Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 26 (Delhi High Court); and [iii] Biocon Limited vs DCIT 155 TTJ 649 (Banglore) (Special Bench) 110. It was also pointed out that the Assessing Officer has placed reliance on the decision of Special Bench but u/s 192 r.w.s 17(2), when the option is exercised by the employee, then tax is to be deducted at source. 111. The Ld.DR for the Revenue placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer and DRP with s…

Arivent Technologies Holdings Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1308/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I.Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…37(1) of the Act. In this regard reliance was placed on the following decisions:- [i] CIT vs M/s PVP Ventures Ltd. 211 Taxman 554 (Madras High Court); [ii] CIT vs Lemon Tree Hotels Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 26 (Delhi High Court); and [iii] Biocon Limited vs DCIT 155 TTJ 649 (Banglore) (Special Bench) 110. It was also pointed out that the Assessing Officer has placed reliance on the decision of Special Bench but u/s 192 r.w.s 17(2), when the option is exercised by the employee, then tax is to be deducted at source. 111. The Ld.DR for the Revenue placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer and DRP with s…