Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. ACIT

273 ITR 152High Court2005#4020 most cited

What is Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

Allocation of R&D expenditure to eligible units is not clearly warranted when R&D units are maintained within manufacturing units and not as independent entities. This is particularly relevant when the Assessing Officer allocates R&D expenses to Export Oriented Units (EOUs) in the ratio of turnover, and the Commissioner (Appeals) has deleted such additions.

29

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Bush Boake Allen India Ltd v. ACIT · R&D expenditure allocation · manufacturing units · independent units · Section 10B · EOU units · turnover ratio · Commissioner Appeals

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 35(2AB)Section 80IBSection 10BSection 201Section 40(a)(i)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 72

Issues it is cited on

section 92ba(i)section 6(1)r&d expendituresection 92basection 80hhsection 72section 10bsection 80hsection 35(2ab)section 80ibsection 90(2)section 80hhc

Judgments citing Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. ACIT

STRIDES PHARMA SCIENCE LIMITED,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of assessee for A

ITA 769/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2380/Chny/2018 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shasun Pharmaceuticals Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of (Merged With M/S. Strides Shasun Vs. Income Tax, Ltd., Now Known As Strides Pharma Non Corporate Circle-6(1), Science Ltd.,) Chennai. No.28, Batra Centre, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aadcs 8104P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Maithili, Addl. CIT
Section 10B

…the company. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee maintains separate books of account with respect to the R & D unit. The Ld. AR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High court in the case of Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 (Mad.) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Zandu Pharmaceuticals Work Ltd. vs. CIT 31 taxmann.com 191 (Bom.). 6.3 We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The assessee has claimed scientific research expenditure amounting to Rs.14,03,32,595/-. The A.O while computing deducti…

DCIT CIRCLE-15 (3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHASUN PHARMACEUTICALS LTD NOW KNOW AS STRIDES PHARMA SCIENCE LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of assessee for A

ITA 5404/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2380/Chny/2018 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shasun Pharmaceuticals Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of (Merged With M/S. Strides Shasun Vs. Income Tax, Ltd., Now Known As Strides Pharma Non Corporate Circle-6(1), Science Ltd.,) Chennai. No.28, Batra Centre, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aadcs 8104P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Maithili, Addl. CIT
Section 10B

…the company. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee maintains separate books of account with respect to the R & D unit. The Ld. AR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High court in the case of Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 (Mad.) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Zandu Pharmaceuticals Work Ltd. vs. CIT 31 taxmann.com 191 (Bom.). 6.3 We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The assessee has claimed scientific research expenditure amounting to Rs.14,03,32,595/-. The A.O while computing deducti…

STRIDES PHARMA SCIENCE LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC - 6 (2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of assessee for A

ITA 2335/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2380/Chny/2018 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shasun Pharmaceuticals Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of (Merged With M/S. Strides Shasun Vs. Income Tax, Ltd., Now Known As Strides Pharma Non Corporate Circle-6(1), Science Ltd.,) Chennai. No.28, Batra Centre, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aadcs 8104P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Maithili, Addl. CIT
Section 10B

…the company. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee maintains separate books of account with respect to the R & D unit. The Ld. AR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High court in the case of Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 (Mad.) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Zandu Pharmaceuticals Work Ltd. vs. CIT 31 taxmann.com 191 (Bom.). 6.3 We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The assessee has claimed scientific research expenditure amounting to Rs.14,03,32,595/-. The A.O while computing deducti…

DCIT-15(3)(2), CHENNAI vs. M/S.SHASUN PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED (MERGED WITH STRIDES SHASUN LIMITED), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of assessee for A

ITA 4945/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2380/Chny/2018 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shasun Pharmaceuticals Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of (Merged With M/S. Strides Shasun Vs. Income Tax, Ltd., Now Known As Strides Pharma Non Corporate Circle-6(1), Science Ltd.,) Chennai. No.28, Batra Centre, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aadcs 8104P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Maithili, Addl. CIT
Section 10B

…the company. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee maintains separate books of account with respect to the R & D unit. The Ld. AR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High court in the case of Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 (Mad.) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Zandu Pharmaceuticals Work Ltd. vs. CIT 31 taxmann.com 191 (Bom.). 6.3 We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The assessee has claimed scientific research expenditure amounting to Rs.14,03,32,595/-. The A.O while computing deducti…

SHASUN PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of assessee for A

ITA 2380/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2380/Chny/2018 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shasun Pharmaceuticals Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of (Merged With M/S. Strides Shasun Vs. Income Tax, Ltd., Now Known As Strides Pharma Non Corporate Circle-6(1), Science Ltd.,) Chennai. No.28, Batra Centre, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aadcs 8104P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Maithili, Addl. CIT
Section 10B

…the company. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee maintains separate books of account with respect to the R & D unit. The Ld. AR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High court in the case of Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 (Mad.) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Zandu Pharmaceuticals Work Ltd. vs. CIT 31 taxmann.com 191 (Bom.). 6.3 We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The assessee has claimed scientific research expenditure amounting to Rs.14,03,32,595/-. The A.O while computing deducti…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 476/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: the Hon'ble Bombay High Court" 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the material on record and examine the position in law in view of the submissions advanced.

For Appellant: Smt. Sanyogita NagpalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Bansal
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 35Section 801CSection 801ESection 80I

…the case got dismissed. It may please be noted that in this case, R&D units were being maintained in the manufacturing units itself and not as an independent units. Other decisions on this subject are as under:  Bush Booke Allen India Limited v. ACIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 (Mad.)  International Flavors & Fragrances India Ltd v. DCIT [142 of 2005] Madras HC  Bush Baoke Allen India Limited v. ACIT [ITA 548 of 2001] (Mad.)  Vanaz Engineers Limited [ITA No. 34 & 35/PN/1989]  Ponds India Limited [ITA No 2047/Mad/88]  Wockardt India Limited [3991/Mum/2005]  Wockarh India Limited [71/Mum/2007]  FDC Limited v. ACIT…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 475/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: the Hon'ble Bombay High Court" 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the material on record and examine the position in law in view of the submissions advanced.

For Appellant: Smt. Sanyogita NagpalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Bansal
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 35Section 801CSection 801ESection 80I

…the case got dismissed. It may please be noted that in this case, R&D units were being maintained in the manufacturing units itself and not as an independent units. Other decisions on this subject are as under:  Bush Booke Allen India Limited v. ACIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 (Mad.)  International Flavors & Fragrances India Ltd v. DCIT [142 of 2005] Madras HC  Bush Baoke Allen India Limited v. ACIT [ITA 548 of 2001] (Mad.)  Vanaz Engineers Limited [ITA No. 34 & 35/PN/1989]  Ponds India Limited [ITA No 2047/Mad/88]  Wockardt India Limited [3991/Mum/2005]  Wockarh India Limited [71/Mum/2007]  FDC Limited v. ACIT…

DCIT(CC)-2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3474/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 35Section 80ISection 92B

…d office of the assessee, cannot be taken into consideration while computing the deduction under the said provisions. 14. Ms. Khan's reliance upon a judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 is well founded. In that case, the assessee claimed a deduction under sections Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., AY 2013-14 to 2016-17 80HH and 80-1. The Assessing Officer allocated certain expenditure on research and development pertaining to the Chittoor unit. It was submitted by the assessee that the amount so included did not pertain to the Chi…

DCIT(CC)-2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3473/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 35Section 80ISection 92B

…d office of the assessee, cannot be taken into consideration while computing the deduction under the said provisions. 14. Ms. Khan's reliance upon a judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 is well founded. In that case, the assessee claimed a deduction under sections Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., AY 2013-14 to 2016-17 80HH and 80-1. The Assessing Officer allocated certain expenditure on research and development pertaining to the Chittoor unit. It was submitted by the assessee that the amount so included did not pertain to the Chi…

DCIT(CC)-2(4), MUMBAI., MUMBAI vs. MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3472/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 35Section 80ISection 92B

…d office of the assessee, cannot be taken into consideration while computing the deduction under the said provisions. 14. Ms. Khan's reliance upon a judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 is well founded. In that case, the assessee claimed a deduction under sections Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., AY 2013-14 to 2016-17 80HH and 80-1. The Assessing Officer allocated certain expenditure on research and development pertaining to the Chittoor unit. It was submitted by the assessee that the amount so included did not pertain to the Chi…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CC)-2(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3471/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 35Section 80ISection 92B

…d office of the assessee, cannot be taken into consideration while computing the deduction under the said provisions. 14. Ms. Khan's reliance upon a judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 is well founded. In that case, the assessee claimed a deduction under sections Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., AY 2013-14 to 2016-17 80HH and 80-1. The Assessing Officer allocated certain expenditure on research and development pertaining to the Chittoor unit. It was submitted by the assessee that the amount so included did not pertain to the Chi…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2731/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Dcit, Vs Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ugf-15, Indraprastha Building, 21, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan-Aaaca0377R Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80I

…nless the expenditure incurred on the R & D work relates to the undertaking/unit in question, the same cannot be apportioned to it on hypothetical basis: • Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works Limited v. CIT: 350 ITR 366 (Born.) • Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. CIT: 273 ITR 152 (Mad.) It is further submitted that all the impugned eligible projects were launched in earlier years which stood substantially sold out and were nearing completion during the year under consideration. The details of launch of the project and percentage of completion as at the end of the relevant assessment year are as under: S.No Name of the el…

SVP INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 22(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed in the manner as indicated above

ITA 4026/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & M.Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri M.P Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 80ASection 80J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 4025 & 4026/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s SVP Industries Ltd., The ACIT Circle 22(2), New Delhi 59/15, Ground Floor, Satyam House, Ravidas Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi vs. 110019 PAN AAECS 3637 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri M.P Rastogi, Adv. For Revenue : Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 19.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 13.10.2023 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. These appeals have been filed against the order o…

SVP INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed in the manner as indicated above

ITA 4025/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & M.Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri M.P Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 80ASection 80J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 4025 & 4026/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s SVP Industries Ltd., The ACIT Circle 22(2), New Delhi 59/15, Ground Floor, Satyam House, Ravidas Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi vs. 110019 PAN AAECS 3637 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri M.P Rastogi, Adv. For Revenue : Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 19.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 13.10.2023 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. These appeals have been filed against the order o…

M/S. INTERARCH BUILDING PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1137/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2006-07 Interarch Building Vs. Dcit Products Pvt. Ltd., Circle -11 (1) Farm No.8 Khasra New Delhi No.56/23/2, Dera Mandi Village, Mehrauli New Delhi-110047 Pan No.Aaaci0106J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80ISection 94

…e allocation of such head Office expenses should not be made to industrial unit while working out the profits of the industrial undertaking eligible for deduction u/s 80IB and 80IC of IT Act: (i) 350 ITR 366-371 Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd. vs. CIT (ii) 273 ITR 152 (Mad) Bush Boake Allen India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (iii) 394 ITR 73 (Bom) CIT vs. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (iv) 350 ITR 41-51 (Del) CIT vs. EHPT India P. Ltd. 20. In view of the above arguments, the learned Counsel submitted that deduction u/s 80IB in respect of the profits of the ‘Greater Noida’ unit and profits u/s 80IC in respect of ‘Pant Nag…

MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 10(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 7167/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ashok BansalFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

…assessee’s case. 11 ITA.NO. 7167/MUM/2017 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., 14. Ld. Counsel for the assessee also placed reliance on the following decisions in support of his submissions: - (i). Bush Baoke Allen India Limited v. ACIT [2005] 273 ITR 152 (Mad.) (ii). International Flavors & Fragrances India Ltd v. DCIT [142 of 2005] Madras HC. (iii). Bush Baoke Allen India Limited v. ACIT [TA 548 of 2004] (Mad.) (iv). Vanaz Engineers Limited [ITA No. 34 &35/PN/1989] (v). Ponds India Limited [ITA No. 2047/Mad/88] (vi). Wockardt India Limited [3991/Mum/2005] (vii). Wockardt India Limited [71/Mum/20…

ULTIMATE FLEXIPACK LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 901/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble & Ultimate Flexipack Ltd. Vs Dcit 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-18 Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1 Ara Centre,E-2, Jhandewalan New Delhi Aaacu6565D New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs Ultimate Flexipack Ltd. Central Circle-18 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Ara Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan Pamposh Enclave, Greater New Delhi Kailash-1 New Delhi Aaacu6565D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 80Section 80I

…words, only income and expenses which have a direct nexus with the manufacturing activity of the undertaking have to be considered and taken into account: i) Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. vs. CIT 350 ITR 166 (Bom) ii) Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. vs. ACIT 273 ITR 152 (Mad) iii) CIT vs. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. 394 ITR 73 (Bom) iv) Liberty India vs. CIT 317 ITR 218 (SC) 7. The Ld. AR submitted that such technical know-how which has been acquired by the assessee from Mr. Ashok Chaturvedi has been shared by the assessee not only for the manufacture of products in Baddi and Jammu units but has shared it with othe…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ULTIMATE FLEXIBLE LTD, NEW DELHI

ITA 2782/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble & Ultimate Flexipack Ltd. Vs Dcit 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-18 Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1 Ara Centre,E-2, Jhandewalan New Delhi Aaacu6565D New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs Ultimate Flexipack Ltd. Central Circle-18 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Ara Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan Pamposh Enclave, Greater New Delhi Kailash-1 New Delhi Aaacu6565D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 80Section 80I

…words, only income and expenses which have a direct nexus with the manufacturing activity of the undertaking have to be considered and taken into account: i) Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. vs. CIT 350 ITR 166 (Bom) ii) Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. vs. ACIT 273 ITR 152 (Mad) iii) CIT vs. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. 394 ITR 73 (Bom) iv) Liberty India vs. CIT 317 ITR 218 (SC) 7. The Ld. AR submitted that such technical know-how which has been acquired by the assessee from Mr. Ashok Chaturvedi has been shared by the assessee not only for the manufacture of products in Baddi and Jammu units but has shared it with othe…

ULTIMATE FLEXIPACK LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2199/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble & Ultimate Flexipack Ltd. Vs Dcit 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Central Circle-18 Pamposh Enclave, Greater Kailash-1 Ara Centre,E-2, Jhandewalan New Delhi Aaacu6565D New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs Ultimate Flexipack Ltd. Central Circle-18 305, 3Rd Floor, Bhanot Corner, Ara Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan Pamposh Enclave, Greater New Delhi Kailash-1 New Delhi Aaacu6565D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 80Section 80I

…words, only income and expenses which have a direct nexus with the manufacturing activity of the undertaking have to be considered and taken into account: i) Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. vs. CIT 350 ITR 166 (Bom) ii) Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. vs. ACIT 273 ITR 152 (Mad) iii) CIT vs. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. 394 ITR 73 (Bom) iv) Liberty India vs. CIT 317 ITR 218 (SC) 7. The Ld. AR submitted that such technical know-how which has been acquired by the assessee from Mr. Ashok Chaturvedi has been shared by the assessee not only for the manufacture of products in Baddi and Jammu units but has shared it with othe…

DCIT,NEW DELHI vs. MONTAGE ENTERPRISES (P) LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 556/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 115JSection 14ASection 80I

…er the said provisions. 5.3.2 Hon'ble Bombay High Court while deciding the decision in the case of Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd (supra) had relied upon the decision of Madras High Court in the case of Bush Boak Allen (India) limited versus ACIT reported in 273 ITR 152. 5.4. In our considered opinion on the present facts of assessee’s case stands squarely covered by the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd (supra). The assessee has paid certain royalty towards the ITA No. 6963/Del/2014 & 553/Del/2015 7 technical know-how obtained by it and it had received…

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2

Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. ACIT (273 ITR 152) — Cited in 29 Judgments | BharatTax