Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

21 Taxmann.com 483Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#2542 most cited

What is Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Addl. CIT authority for?

When computing profits of an eligible unit for tax incentives, profits attributable to marketing and R&D activities carried out outside the eligible unit should not be demarcated or excluded. The re-computation of deductions under tax holiday sections is justified only when there is an arrangement to earn more than ordinary profits.

46

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Addl. CIT · Section 10AA · Section 35(1)(iv) · Section 35(2AB) · eligible unit profit computation · R&D expenditure outside unit · marketing expenditure outside unit · demarcation of profits · re-computation of deduction · tax holiday profits · Section 80IA(8) · Section 145(3)

Also reported as

67 SOT 110

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 35(1)(iv)Section 37Section 115JBSection 145Section 35(2AB)

Issues it is cited on

scientific research expendituresection 35(1)(iv)section 115bbdnew employeessection 80ia(8)section 35(1)(i)section 2(1)section 10(2)section 35(1)section 92bar&d expendituresection 35(2ab)

Judgments citing Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

Videotex International (P) Ltd, Ludhiana vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 833/CHANDI/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Guptavideotex International (P) Ltd., Vs. The J.C.I.T., Ludhiana. Range Iii, Ludhiana. Pan: Aaacv5472C & Videotex International (P) Ltd., Vs. The Addl. Cit, Ludhiana. Range Iii, Ludhiana. Pan: Aaacv5472C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Navneet Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh, DR
Section 14ASection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Videotex International (P) Ltd., Vs. The J.C.I.T., Ludhiana. Range III, Ludhiana. PAN: AAACV5472C And Videotex International (P) Ltd., Vs. The Addl. CIT, Ludhiana. Range III, Ludhiana. PAN: AAACV5472C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Navneet Sehgal, CA Respondent by : Shri Manjit Singh, DR Date of hearing : 21.12.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 19.03.2018 ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M.: Both the above appeals have been preferred by the same assessee agai…

ACIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Wockhardt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4156/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. TharFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar -DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई मुंबई “ केकेकेके” खंडपीठ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“K”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम एवं राम राम लाल राम लाल लाल नेगी लाल नेगी नेगी, "याियक नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./4156/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Praveen Industries Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed whereas the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 2239/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav. Shri B.P. Jainand

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Paramita Tripathy, CIT-DR
Section 10BSection 10B(1)Section 139(1)Section 40Section 43B

…Translam Ltd. 231 Taxman 901 (All) ii) CIT v. Delhi Press Samachar Patra Prakashan (P) Ltd. 296 ITR 210 (AT) affirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Delhi Press Samachar Patra Prakashan 355 ITR 1 iii) Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Addl. CIT 67 SOT 110 (Ahd) iv) ACIT v. P.I. Industries 143 TTJ 353 (Jodh) v) ACIT v. Micro Turners ITA No. 4569/D/2011 dated 15.2.2013 13. The ld. CIT DR supported the stand of CIT(A) and submitted that allocation was fair and reasonable. She conceded that though books of accounts have not been rejected but the disallowance by invoking section 80IA(10) of the Act is…

M/S Praveen Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed whereas the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 1790/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav. Shri B.P. Jainand

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Paramita Tripathy, CIT-DR
Section 10BSection 10B(1)Section 139(1)Section 40Section 43B

…Translam Ltd. 231 Taxman 901 (All) ii) CIT v. Delhi Press Samachar Patra Prakashan (P) Ltd. 296 ITR 210 (AT) affirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Delhi Press Samachar Patra Prakashan 355 ITR 1 iii) Cadila Healthcare Ltd. v. Addl. CIT 67 SOT 110 (Ahd) iv) ACIT v. P.I. Industries 143 TTJ 353 (Jodh) v) ACIT v. Micro Turners ITA No. 4569/D/2011 dated 15.2.2013 13. The ld. CIT DR supported the stand of CIT(A) and submitted that allocation was fair and reasonable. She conceded that though books of accounts have not been rejected but the disallowance by invoking section 80IA(10) of the Act is…

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…elling and distribution arm of the assessee and the cost incurred is allocated to these respective units on the basis of appropriate allocation key of sales. Ld. AR of the appellant relying on the decision of coordinate bench of Cadila Healthcare Ltd vs. ACIT 21 Taxmann.com 483 has submitted that there cannot be any specific demarcation between manufacturing and selling activities of the assessee and profit accrues only at the time of sales of the goods only. Therefore, the contention of the revenue that selling and distribution function of the assessee is a separate profit center is required to be rejected at He…

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, we direct the AO to reduce the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act by the amount of reversal of the provision of Rs

ITA 196/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I. C.Sudhir Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishia.Y.: - 2008-09 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Acit 12Th Floor, Devika Tower, Range -15 6, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacr0127N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: 1. Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92D

…ling and distribution arm of the assessee and the cost incurred is allocated to these respective units on the basis of appropriate allocation key of ‗sales‘. Ld. AR of the appellant relying on the decision of coordinate bench of Cadila Healthcare Ltd vs. ACIT 21 Taxmann.com 483 has submitted that there cannot be any specific demarcation between manufacturing and selling activities of the assessee and profit accrues only at the time of sales of the goods only. Therefore, ITA 196 Del 2013 Ranbaxy Laboratories limited V ACIT A.Y. 2008-09 Page 110 of 134 the contention of the revenue that selling and distribution f…