CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty

128 ITR 294Supreme Court of India1981#92 most cited

What is CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty authority for?

When the cost of acquisition of a capital asset cannot be determined, the computation mechanism for capital gains fails, and thus no capital gains can be charged. This establishes a broader principle that a charging section cannot operate in the absence of specific machinery provisions for computation.

628

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty · 128 ITR 294 · Section 45 · Section 48 · Section 55(2) · cost of acquisition · capital gains computation · machinery provision · unascertainable cost · intangible assets · taxability of goodwill · no tax without machinery

Also reported as

5 Taxmann 1

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115JBSection 92BSection 234BSection 45Section 55(2)Section 143(2)Section 144

Issues it is cited on

section 211section 55section 32(1)(ii)section 21section 92bsection 32(1)intangible assetssection 48section 45book profitsfair market valuesection 115j

Judgments citing CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Kolkata vs. M/S. Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited

Accordingly the same stands dismissed without

ITAT/147/2024HC Calcutta24 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 24Th May, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Aryak Dutt, Adv. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …For Appellant.

Section 14ASection 2Section 260ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 55

…ary being a non- physical asset that can easily be converted into cash ? d. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT was justified in law in relying upon Hon’ble Supreme Court case in the case of CIT vs. B C Srinivasa Setty [1981] 128 ITR 294 [SC] wherein issue of self-whereas issue under generated goodwill has been discussed consideration in case of assessee is transfer of Voting Right/assignment of rights to subscribe to equity shares ? e. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT was justified in law in upholding the order of the CIT[A] by deleting the…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Jose Thomas

ITA/56/2020HC Kerala03 Apr 2024

Bench: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.

For Respondent: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

…tax. The Department's Appeal to the High Court was dismissed and that is how it approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In dealing with the rival contentions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: '(8) In 1981 this court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Shetty(1981) 128 ITR 294; (1981) 2 SCC 460 held that all transactions encompassed by section 45 must fall within the computation provisions of section 48. If the computation as provided under section 48 could not be applied to a particular transaction, it must be regardedas "never intended by section 45 to be the subject of the charge". In that case, the court…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gracy Babu

ITA/48/2020HC Kerala03 Apr 2024

Bench: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.

For Respondent: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

…tax. The Department's Appeal to the High Court was dismissed and that is how it approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In dealing with the rival contentions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: '(8) In 1981 this court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Shetty(1981) 128 ITR 294; (1981) 2 SCC 460 held that all transactions encompassed by section 45 must fall within the computation provisions of section 48. If the computation as provided under section 48 could not be applied to a particular transaction, it must be regardedas "never intended by section 45 to be the subject of the charge". In that case, the court…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Reena Jose

ITA/47/2020HC Kerala03 Apr 2024

Bench: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.

For Respondent: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

…tax. The Department's Appeal to the High Court was dismissed and that is how it approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In dealing with the rival contentions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: '(8) In 1981 this court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Shetty(1981) 128 ITR 294; (1981) 2 SCC 460 held that all transactions encompassed by section 45 must fall within the computation provisions of section 48. If the computation as provided under section 48 could not be applied to a particular transaction, it must be regardedas "never intended by section 45 to be the subject of the charge". In that case, the court…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Smt.Gracy Babu

ITA/54/2020HC Kerala03 Apr 2024

Bench: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.

For Respondent: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

…tax. The Department's Appeal to the High Court was dismissed and that is how it approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In dealing with the rival contentions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: '(8) In 1981 this court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Shetty(1981) 128 ITR 294; (1981) 2 SCC 460 held that all transactions encompassed by section 45 must fall within the computation provisions of section 48. If the computation as provided under section 48 could not be applied to a particular transaction, it must be regardedas "never intended by section 45 to be the subject of the charge". In that case, the court…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Jose Thomas

ITA/46/2020HC Kerala03 Apr 2024

Bench: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.

For Respondent: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

…tax. The Department's Appeal to the High Court was dismissed and that is how it approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In dealing with the rival contentions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: '(8) In 1981 this court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Shetty(1981) 128 ITR 294; (1981) 2 SCC 460 held that all transactions encompassed by section 45 must fall within the computation provisions of section 48. If the computation as provided under section 48 could not be applied to a particular transaction, it must be regardedas "never intended by section 45 to be the subject of the charge". In that case, the court…

Super Dairy Farm., Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)., Hyderabad

ITA 1288/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.1287 & 1288/Hyd/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Super Dairy Farm, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Circle – 4(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aajfs7269L. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1265/Hyd/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14) The Assistant Vs. Super Dairy Farm, Commissioner Of Income Hyderabad. Tax, Circle – 4(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aajfs7269L. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sashank Dundu, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 48

…hence exempt. If the provisions contained under sections 45 and 48 are scanned there can be no shadow of doubt that the cost of acquisition being unworkable in the case of this nature, no taxable income would be accrued. In CIT v. B. C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 128 ITR 294, the apex court has held that section 45 is a charging section and section 48 provides base for computation. If in the facts of a particular case, computation under section 48 is not possible, the charge under section 45 fails because it cannot be effectuated. The same argument is supported by the following judgments: 1. Sri Krishna Dairy & Agri…

Super Dairy Farm., Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)., Hyderabad

ITA 1287/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.1287 & 1288/Hyd/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Super Dairy Farm, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Circle – 4(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aajfs7269L. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1265/Hyd/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14) The Assistant Vs. Super Dairy Farm, Commissioner Of Income Hyderabad. Tax, Circle – 4(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aajfs7269L. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sashank Dundu, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 48

…hence exempt. If the provisions contained under sections 45 and 48 are scanned there can be no shadow of doubt that the cost of acquisition being unworkable in the case of this nature, no taxable income would be accrued. In CIT v. B. C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 128 ITR 294, the apex court has held that section 45 is a charging section and section 48 provides base for computation. If in the facts of a particular case, computation under section 48 is not possible, the charge under section 45 fails because it cannot be effectuated. The same argument is supported by the following judgments: 1. Sri Krishna Dairy & Agri…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)., Hyderabad vs. Super Dairy Farm., Hyderabad

ITA 1265/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.1287 & 1288/Hyd/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Super Dairy Farm, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Circle – 4(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aajfs7269L. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1265/Hyd/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14) The Assistant Vs. Super Dairy Farm, Commissioner Of Income Hyderabad. Tax, Circle – 4(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aajfs7269L. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sashank Dundu, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 48

…hence exempt. If the provisions contained under sections 45 and 48 are scanned there can be no shadow of doubt that the cost of acquisition being unworkable in the case of this nature, no taxable income would be accrued. In CIT v. B. C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 128 ITR 294, the apex court has held that section 45 is a charging section and section 48 provides base for computation. If in the facts of a particular case, computation under section 48 is not possible, the charge under section 45 fails because it cannot be effectuated. The same argument is supported by the following judgments: 1. Sri Krishna Dairy & Agri…

Kamla Bai, Bundi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Bundi

ITA 622/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Yogesh Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Arvind Kumar (CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 48

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 622/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18 cuke Kamla Bai The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward No. 20, Mirapura Kparen Ward, Bundi Bundi, Keshoroypartan, Bundi, Rajasthan LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: CLJPB 0279 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Yogesh Parwal (CA) jktLo dh v…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Canara Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 663/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…n 115JB in order to make the provisions applicable. (vi) When the charging section and the computing provision together would constitute an integrated code. In case charging section does not apply then the computation section fails. CIT vs B C Shrinivas Setty 128 ITR 294 = 2002-TIOL-587-SC-IT- LB." 58. However, the plea of the assessee with respect to non- applicability of section 115JB to the Banking Companies was rejected by the ITAT Mumbai "B" Bench in ITA No. 1767/Mum/2019 for the A.Y. 2015-16 in the case of Bank of India vs ACIT Mumbai vide order dated 11th December, 2020. 59. There is no jurisdictional High…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 392/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…n 115JB in order to make the provisions applicable. (vi) When the charging section and the computing provision together would constitute an integrated code. In case charging section does not apply then the computation section fails. CIT vs B C Shrinivas Setty 128 ITR 294 = 2002-TIOL-587-SC-IT- LB." 58. However, the plea of the assessee with respect to non- applicability of section 115JB to the Banking Companies was rejected by the ITAT Mumbai "B" Bench in ITA No. 1767/Mum/2019 for the A.Y. 2015-16 in the case of Bank of India vs ACIT Mumbai vide order dated 11th December, 2020. 59. There is no jurisdictional High…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…n 115JB in order to make the provisions applicable. (vi) When the charging section and the computing provision together would constitute an integrated code. In case charging section does not apply then the computation section fails. CIT vs B C Shrinivas Setty 128 ITR 294 = 2002-TIOL-587-SC-IT- LB." 58. However, the plea of the assessee with respect to non- applicability of section 115JB to the Banking Companies was rejected by the ITAT Mumbai "B" Bench in ITA No. 1767/Mum/2019 for the A.Y. 2015-16 in the case of Bank of India vs ACIT Mumbai vide order dated 11th December, 2020. 59. There is no jurisdictional High…

Atomstroyexport, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)Circle -1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 575/MUM/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 44B

…ion of India [2014] 50 taxmann.com 300/368 ITR 1/[2015] 228 Taxman 25 ( Bom .). Further, the Machinery Section of the act cannot be read de-hors charging section. The act has to be read as integrated manner. Supreme Court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 128 ITR 294, held that: "No doubt there is a qualitative difference between the charging provision and a computation provision. And ordinarily the operation of the charging provision cannot be affected by the construction of a particular computation provision. But the question here is whether it is possible to apply the computation provision at all if a cer…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 7(1), Kolkata vs. Damodar Valley Corporation, Kolkata

ITA 892/KOL/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 211Section 250

…d attracted and consequently, the charging provision, namely, sub-section (1) of section 115JB would not stand attracted. To support such finding, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 5 Taxman 1/128 ITR 294 and CIT v. Eli Lilly & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 505/312 ITR 225. Thus, in conclusion the court held that all taxation is meant for the welfare of the people in a Page 9 of 15 I.T.A. Nos.: 889, 890, 891 & 892/KOL/2023 AYs: 2012-13, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Damodar Valley Corporation. constitutional republic and, therefore, the en…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 7(1), Kolkata vs. Damodar Valley Corporation, Kolkata

ITA 891/KOL/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 211Section 250

…d attracted and consequently, the charging provision, namely, sub-section (1) of section 115JB would not stand attracted. To support such finding, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 5 Taxman 1/128 ITR 294 and CIT v. Eli Lilly & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 505/312 ITR 225. Thus, in conclusion the court held that all taxation is meant for the welfare of the people in a Page 9 of 15 I.T.A. Nos.: 889, 890, 891 & 892/KOL/2023 AYs: 2012-13, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Damodar Valley Corporation. constitutional republic and, therefore, the en…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 7(1), Kolka, Kolkata vs. Damodar Valley Corporation, Kolkata

ITA 890/KOL/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 211Section 250

…d attracted and consequently, the charging provision, namely, sub-section (1) of section 115JB would not stand attracted. To support such finding, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 5 Taxman 1/128 ITR 294 and CIT v. Eli Lilly & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 505/312 ITR 225. Thus, in conclusion the court held that all taxation is meant for the welfare of the people in a Page 9 of 15 I.T.A. Nos.: 889, 890, 891 & 892/KOL/2023 AYs: 2012-13, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Damodar Valley Corporation. constitutional republic and, therefore, the en…

Assistant Commissioner of Income, Circle - 7(1), Kolkata vs. Damodar Valley Corporation, Kolkata

ITA 889/KOL/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 211Section 250

…d attracted and consequently, the charging provision, namely, sub-section (1) of section 115JB would not stand attracted. To support such finding, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 5 Taxman 1/128 ITR 294 and CIT v. Eli Lilly & Co. (India) (P.) Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 505/312 ITR 225. Thus, in conclusion the court held that all taxation is meant for the welfare of the people in a Page 9 of 15 I.T.A. Nos.: 889, 890, 891 & 892/KOL/2023 AYs: 2012-13, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Damodar Valley Corporation. constitutional republic and, therefore, the en…

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 3553/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Nuclear Power Corporation Of Acit, Range-3(2), India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. Central Avenue, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094. Pan No. Aaacn 3154 F Appellant Respondent

…learned counsel for the appellant is that in view of the judgment of the the appellant is that in view of the judgment of the the appellant is that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Supreme Court in C.I.T. v. B.C.Srinivasa Setty [(1981) [(1981) 128 ITR 294 128 ITR 294 (SC)] and CIT v. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) P.Ltd SC)] and CIT v. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) P.Ltd. [(2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC)], where the computation [(2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC)], where the computation [(2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC)], where the computation provision could not be applied in a particular case, it is provision could not be applied i…

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 2452/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Nuclear Power Corporation Of Acit, Range-3(2), India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. Central Avenue, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094. Pan No. Aaacn 3154 F Appellant Respondent

…learned counsel for the appellant is that in view of the judgment of the the appellant is that in view of the judgment of the the appellant is that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Supreme Court in C.I.T. v. B.C.Srinivasa Setty [(1981) [(1981) 128 ITR 294 128 ITR 294 (SC)] and CIT v. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) P.Ltd SC)] and CIT v. Eli Lilly and Co. (India) P.Ltd. [(2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC)], where the computation [(2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC)], where the computation [(2009) 312 ITR 225 (SC)], where the computation provision could not be applied in a particular case, it is provision could not be applied i…