CIT v. Goa Mineral Pvt. Ltd.

396 ITR 452High Court2017#15777 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 32Section 40A(2)(b)Section 43BSection 80IBSection 145ASection 24Section 37

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(2)(a)actual payment basisopening wdvsection 80hset off of lossessection 145asection 80hhsection 40a(2)(b)section 40a(2)block of assetsbeneficial ownersection 260

Judgments citing CIT v. Goa Mineral Pvt. Ltd.

Addl CIT 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Sanofi India Limited (Formerly Known As M/S. Aventis Pharma Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

ITA 6698/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (CIT-DR) &
Section 32Section 32(1)

…ly of vaccines from Chiron India, it is like co existence and mutual dependence. 6698 M 2011 & C.O. No. 165 M 2012-Sanofi India Limited 40. In the similar situation and facts, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Goa Mineral Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 396 ITR 452 (Bom.) (Goa Bench) held as under: - “5. We have duly considered the rival contentions and we have also gone through the records. Section 40A(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act reads thus : “(2)(a) Where the assessee incurs any expenditure in respect of which payment has been or is to be made to any person referred to in clause (b) of this sub- section,…

Addl CIT RG 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Sanofi India Limited (Formerly Known As M/S. Aventis Pharma Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

ITA 7712/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (CIT-DR) &
Section 32Section 32(1)

…ly of vaccines from Chiron India, it is like co existence and mutual dependence. 6698 M 2011 & C.O. No. 165 M 2012-Sanofi India Limited 40. In the similar situation and facts, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Goa Mineral Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 396 ITR 452 (Bom.) (Goa Bench) held as under: - “5. We have duly considered the rival contentions and we have also gone through the records. Section 40A(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act reads thus : “(2)(a) Where the assessee incurs any expenditure in respect of which payment has been or is to be made to any person referred to in clause (b) of this sub- section,…

Sanofi India Ltd Formerly Known As Aventis Pharma Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

ITA 6626/MUM/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (CIT-DR) &
Section 32Section 32(1)

…ly of vaccines from Chiron India, it is like co existence and mutual dependence. 6698 M 2011 & C.O. No. 165 M 2012-Sanofi India Limited 40. In the similar situation and facts, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Goa Mineral Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 396 ITR 452 (Bom.) (Goa Bench) held as under: - “5. We have duly considered the rival contentions and we have also gone through the records. Section 40A(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act reads thus : “(2)(a) Where the assessee incurs any expenditure in respect of which payment has been or is to be made to any person referred to in clause (b) of this sub- section,…

M/S Sanofi India Ltd (Formerly Known As Aventis Pharma Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ACIT RG 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1606/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c)

…eged payment of higher expenditure more particularly, if recipient of such payment is also taxed at the same/higher rate as the Assessee, Section 40A(2) cannot be called into aid. Aforementioned ruling is subsequently followed in CIT v. GOA MINERALS PVT. LTD. 396 ITR 452 (BOM). Therefore, if whole transaction is tax neutral in the sense that both Assessee and payee fall in the same tax bracket then there is no question of attempt to evade tax as laid down in ITO v. HDFC TRUSTEE MANAGEMENT LTD 10 ITR (TRIB)-OL (ITAT) (MUM) following ratio of pronouncement of Supreme Court in CIT v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT LTD 195…

ACIT- 3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Mm/S Sanofi India Limited (Formerly Known As Aventis Pharma Ltd)., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1302/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c)

…eged payment of higher expenditure more particularly, if recipient of such payment is also taxed at the same/higher rate as the Assessee, Section 40A(2) cannot be called into aid. Aforementioned ruling is subsequently followed in CIT v. GOA MINERALS PVT. LTD. 396 ITR 452 (BOM). Therefore, if whole transaction is tax neutral in the sense that both Assessee and payee fall in the same tax bracket then there is no question of attempt to evade tax as laid down in ITO v. HDFC TRUSTEE MANAGEMENT LTD 10 ITR (TRIB)-OL (ITAT) (MUM) following ratio of pronouncement of Supreme Court in CIT v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE ASIA PVT LTD 195…

Autofin Limited, Secunderabad, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 736/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Smt. M. Narmada
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40ASection 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)

…on rent is 833 sq.yds. and not 400 sq.yds. as mentioned by the AO and also the lease rent of Rs. 1,50,000/- per month was paid, as per the lease deed. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Goa Minerals Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 396 ITR 452 ( Bom.) 7. Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of revenue authorities. 4 I.T.A. No. 736/Hyd/2017 M/s Autofin Ltd. 8. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. On perusal of record, we find that similar issue arose before the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2009-10 in ITA N…

CIT v. Goa Mineral Pvt. Ltd. (396 ITR 452) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax