CIT v. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd.

335 ITR 117High Court2011#950 most cited

What is CIT v. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd. authority for?

Weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) is allowable for R&D expenditure incurred even if the approval from the DSIR is granted in a subsequent assessment year, provided the application for approval was made in time. The assessee is entitled to the deduction if the approval is based on verification of details submitted.

112

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd. · Section 35(2AB) · weighted deduction · R&D expenditure · DSIR approval · scientific research expenditure · deduction allowed

Sections most often in play

Section 35(2AB)Section 143(3)Section 1963)Section 37(1)Section 10ASection 115OSection 135 (Companies ActSection 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

scientific research expenditurefreebies to doctorssection 35(1)weighted deductionr&d expendituresection 35(1)(iv)section 35(2ab)section 35csr expenditureprohibited by lawsection 80ibsection 33

Judgments citing CIT v. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd.

M/S. Bhararth Fritz Werner Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2049/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…t be denied merely on the ground that prescribed authority has not submitted report in Form 3CL. 19. The question of allowing deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act was considered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd. [2011] 335 ITR 117 (Del) where AO refused to accord the benefit of the weighted deduction to the assessee under s. 35(2AB) on the ground that recognition and approval was given by the DSIR in February/September, 2006, i.e., in the next assessment year and, therefore, the weighted deduction cannot be allowed. The CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. The Tribunal he…

M/S. Bharath Fritz Werner Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2048/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…t be denied merely on the ground that prescribed authority has not submitted report in Form 3CL. 19. The question of allowing deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act was considered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd. [2011] 335 ITR 117 (Del) where AO refused to accord the benefit of the weighted deduction to the assessee under s. 35(2AB) on the ground that recognition and approval was given by the DSIR in February/September, 2006, i.e., in the next assessment year and, therefore, the weighted deduction cannot be allowed. The CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. The Tribunal he…

M/S. Bharath Fritz Werner Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 11(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2047/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…t be denied merely on the ground that prescribed authority has not submitted report in Form 3CL. 19. The question of allowing deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act was considered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd. [2011] 335 ITR 117 (Del) where AO refused to accord the benefit of the weighted deduction to the assessee under s. 35(2AB) on the ground that recognition and approval was given by the DSIR in February/September, 2006, i.e., in the next assessment year and, therefore, the weighted deduction cannot be allowed. The CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. The Tribunal he…

M/S. Bharath Fritz Werner Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 11(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2046/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…t be denied merely on the ground that prescribed authority has not submitted report in Form 3CL. 19. The question of allowing deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act was considered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd. [2011] 335 ITR 117 (Del) where AO refused to accord the benefit of the weighted deduction to the assessee under s. 35(2AB) on the ground that recognition and approval was given by the DSIR in February/September, 2006, i.e., in the next assessment year and, therefore, the weighted deduction cannot be allowed. The CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. The Tribunal he…

Hero Motocrop Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 9187/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 145ASection 80ISection 92C

…(Guj) - Special Leave Petition (‘SLP’) filed by the Revenue against the aforesaid decision of the Gujarat High Court was dismissed by the Hero Motocorp Ltd. vs. ACIT Supreme Court vide order 4.8.2009, bearing CC No.10181/2009 • CIT vs Sandan Vikas India Ltd.: 335 ITR 117 (Del) – SLP dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order 09.01.2012, bearing CC No.21706/2011 • Maruti Suzuki India Ltd v. Union of India & Anr (397 ITR 728) - The Special Leave Petition of the Revenue was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 11.05.2018 in SLP No. 32458/2017. • CIT vs. Wheels India Ltd.: 336 ITR 513 (Mad) • Banco…

M/S Shilpa Medicare Ltd., Raichur vs. Addl.C.I.T., Raichur

In the result, the appeal on Gr

ITA 1352/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Shilpa Medicare Ltd., Vs. The Additional Commissioner 10/80, 1St Floor, Rajendra Gung, Of Income Tax, Raichur – 584 102 Raichur. Pan: Aadcs 8788 F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, Cit(Dr), Itat, Bengaluru. Assessee By : Shri. S. Annamalai, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 9.9.2015 Of Cit(A) Kalaburagi, Relating To Ay 2011-12. 2. One Of The Issues That Arose For Consideration In The Appeal By The Assessee For Ay 2011-12 Was With Regard To The Allowability Of The Assessee For Weighted Deduction U/S 35(2Ab) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (The Act). Similar Issue Arose For Consideration In The Assessee’S Appeal For Ay 2010-11 Also In Ita No.1351/Bang/2015. The Appeals For Ay 2010-11 & 2011-12 Were Heard Together & A Common Order Was Passed By The Tribunal. On The Issue Of Allowing Deduction U/S.35(2Ab) Of The Act, The Tribunal Came To The Following Conclusion In Its Order Dated 6.2.2020:-

For Appellant: Shri. S. Annamalai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 35

…the assessee apart from relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Claris Life Science (supra) further placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Page 3 of 8 Court in the case of CIT v. Sandan Vikas (India) Pvt. Ltd., 335 ITR 117 (Del) laying down identical proposition and also on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Banco Products (I) Ltd., 405 ITR 318 (Guj). 10. We have perused the aforesaid decisions and we find that in the case of Claris Lifesciences (supra), weighted deduction was claimed by the assessee in AY 2001-02 and the approval was rec…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range - 4, Bangalore vs. M/S. Mahindra Electric Vehicles Limited, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2252/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2012 – 13

For Appellant: Shri Mathivanan, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Sanghvi, A.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35

…be denied merely on the ground that prescribed authority has not submitted report in Form 3CL. 19. The question of allowing deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act was considered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 117 (Del) where AO refused to accord the benefit of the weighted deduction to the assessee under s. 35(2AB) on the ground that recognition and approval was given by the DSIR in February/September, 2006, i.e., in the next assessment year and, therefore, the weighted deduction cannot be allowed. The CIT(A) firmed the order of the AO. The Tribunal held…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Range-8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Life Sciences P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

Accordingly, we hold so. Thus, we reverse the order of Assessing Officer in curtailing the deduction claimed under section 35(2AB) of the Act by ₹ 6,75,000/-. Thus, grounds of appeal No.10.1, 10.2 ...

ITA 4957/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4957 & 6434/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S Reliance Life Acit-8(1)(1), R. No. 624, 6Th Floor, Science Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ R-282, Dhirubhai M. K. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Ambani Estate, Ttc Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Are Of Midc, Rabale Navi Mumbai-400 701 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabcr7594L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.2130/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Reliance Life Jt.Cit (Osd)-8(1)(1), R. No. 624, 6Th Floor, Science Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ R-282, Dhirubhai M. K. Road, Aayakar Ambani Estate, Ttc Bhavan, Vs. Are Of Midc, Mumbai-20 Navi Mumbai-400 701 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabcr7594L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 14ASection 43Section 92F

…ted deduction in respect of the entire 30 I.T.A. No. 2130/Mum/2018 & others M/s Reliance Life Science Pvt. Ltd. expenditure incurred under s. 35(2AB) of the Act by the assessee.” 44. The Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in CIT Vs. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 117 (Del) on similar issue of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act held that the condition precedent was the certificate from DSIR, but the date of certificate was not important, where the objective was to encourage research and development by the business enterprises in India. In the facts before the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi, the a…

Jt.Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) Circle-8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Life Sciences P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

Accordingly, we hold so. Thus, we reverse the order of Assessing Officer in curtailing the deduction claimed under section 35(2AB) of the Act by ₹ 6,75,000/-. Thus, grounds of appeal No.10.1, 10.2 ...

ITA 2130/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4957 & 6434/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/S Reliance Life Acit-8(1)(1), R. No. 624, 6Th Floor, Science Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ R-282, Dhirubhai M. K. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Ambani Estate, Ttc Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Are Of Midc, Rabale Navi Mumbai-400 701 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabcr7594L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.2130/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Reliance Life Jt.Cit (Osd)-8(1)(1), R. No. 624, 6Th Floor, Science Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ R-282, Dhirubhai M. K. Road, Aayakar Ambani Estate, Ttc Bhavan, Vs. Are Of Midc, Mumbai-20 Navi Mumbai-400 701 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabcr7594L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 14ASection 43Section 92F

…ted deduction in respect of the entire 30 I.T.A. No. 2130/Mum/2018 & others M/s Reliance Life Science Pvt. Ltd. expenditure incurred under s. 35(2AB) of the Act by the assessee.” 44. The Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in CIT Vs. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 117 (Del) on similar issue of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act held that the condition precedent was the certificate from DSIR, but the date of certificate was not important, where the objective was to encourage research and development by the business enterprises in India. In the facts before the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi, the a…

M/S. Provimi Animal Nutrition India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2215/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35

…be denied merely on the ground that prescribed authority has not submitted report in Form 3CL. 19. The question of allowing deduction u/s.35(2AB) of the Act was considered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 117 (Del) where AO refused to accord the benefit of the weighted deduction to the assessee under s. 35(2AB) on the ground that recognition and approval was given by the DSIR in February/September, 2006, i.e., in the next assessment year and, therefore, the weighted deduction cannot be allowed. The CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. The Tribunal he…

East West Seeds India Private Limited, Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 702/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…question, we are of the view that the assessee is entitled to claim weighted deduction in respect of the entire expenditure incurred under s. 35(2AB) of the Act by the assessee.” 44. The Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in CIT Vs. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 117 (Del) on similar issue of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act held that the condition precedent was the certificate from DSIR, but the date of certificate was not important, where the objective was to encourage research and development by the business enterprises in India. In the facts before the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi, the a…

East West Seeds India Pvt.Ltd, Aurangabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1, Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3054/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Aug 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…question, we are of the view that the assessee is entitled to claim weighted deduction in respect of the entire expenditure incurred under s. 35(2AB) of the Act by the assessee.” 44. The Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in CIT Vs. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 117 (Del) on similar issue of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act held that the condition precedent was the certificate from DSIR, but the date of certificate was not important, where the objective was to encourage research and development by the business enterprises in India. In the facts before the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi, the a…

East West Seeds India Pvt. Ltd., Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 469/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…question, we are of the view that the assessee is entitled to claim weighted deduction in respect of the entire expenditure incurred under s. 35(2AB) of the Act by the assessee.” 44. The Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in CIT Vs. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd. (2011) 335 ITR 117 (Del) on similar issue of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act held that the condition precedent was the certificate from DSIR, but the date of certificate was not important, where the objective was to encourage research and development by the business enterprises in India. In the facts before the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi, the a…

Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 7(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 7284/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.7284/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd Acit-7(3)(1) T-8B, 5Th Floor, Phoenix House, A-Wing Room No.142 G बनाम/ Phoenix Mill Compound Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 462 Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 013. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcp-2914-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) : अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Urvi A. Mehta-Ld.Ar ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Rajeev Harit -Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तारीख/ : 07/02/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणाक"तारीख/ : 26/05/2020 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश/ O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): - 1.1 Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year [In Short Referred To As ‘Ay’] 2014-15 Contest Certain Additions / Adjustment Made In Final Assessment Order Dated 17/10/2018 Passed By Ld. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-7(3)(1), Mumbai [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13), Pursuant To The Directions Of Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Mumbai

For Appellant: Ms. Urvi A. Mehta-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit -Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 35Section 92C(1)

…ire expenditure incurred under s. 35(2AB) of the Act by the assessee." 44. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in CIT v. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd. [2012] 22 16 M/s. Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd. Assessment Year-2014-15 taxmann.com 19/207 Taxman 216/[2011] 335 ITR 117 (Del) on similar issue of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act held that the condition precedent was the certificate from DSIR, but the date of certificate was not important, where the objective was to encourage research and development by the business enterprises in India. In the facts before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, the a…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ve Commercial Vehicles Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 581/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 580/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 581/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs M/S Ve Commercial Vehicles Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Select City Walk, A-3, Circle-26(1), New Delhi District Centre, New Delhi-110017 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabce9378F

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. N. K. Choudhary, CIT DR &
Section 14ASection 35

…this connection, reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT 920140 51 taxmann.com 245 (Pune-Trib.). In the above case, the Hon’ble ITAT has considered the decisions in the case of CIT Vs. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd. 335 ITR 117 (Del.) and CIT Vs. Claris Life Sciences Ltd. (Guj.). In para 13.3 of the said order, the Hon’ble ITAT has held that in the above mentioned decision simply it was held that once R & D facility is approved by DSIR, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction u/s 35 (2AB). The Hon’ble ITAT has relied upon the decision of Delhi High Court in the c…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ve Commercial Vehicles Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 580/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 580/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 581/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs M/S Ve Commercial Vehicles Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Select City Walk, A-3, Circle-26(1), New Delhi District Centre, New Delhi-110017 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabce9378F

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. N. K. Choudhary, CIT DR &
Section 14ASection 35

…this connection, reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT 920140 51 taxmann.com 245 (Pune-Trib.). In the above case, the Hon’ble ITAT has considered the decisions in the case of CIT Vs. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd. 335 ITR 117 (Del.) and CIT Vs. Claris Life Sciences Ltd. (Guj.). In para 13.3 of the said order, the Hon’ble ITAT has held that in the above mentioned decision simply it was held that once R & D facility is approved by DSIR, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction u/s 35 (2AB). The Hon’ble ITAT has relied upon the decision of Delhi High Court in the c…

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S V E Commercial Vehicles Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5734/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 580/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 581/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs M/S Ve Commercial Vehicles Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Select City Walk, A-3, Circle-26(1), New Delhi District Centre, New Delhi-110017 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabce9378F

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. N. K. Choudhary, CIT DR &
Section 14ASection 35

…this connection, reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT 920140 51 taxmann.com 245 (Pune-Trib.). In the above case, the Hon’ble ITAT has considered the decisions in the case of CIT Vs. Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd. 335 ITR 117 (Del.) and CIT Vs. Claris Life Sciences Ltd. (Guj.). In para 13.3 of the said order, the Hon’ble ITAT has held that in the above mentioned decision simply it was held that once R & D facility is approved by DSIR, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction u/s 35 (2AB). The Hon’ble ITAT has relied upon the decision of Delhi High Court in the c…

ACIT Cir 1, Thane vs. Advance Enzyme Technologies P.Ltd, Thane

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3353/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ramlal Negisl.

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Verma, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAMLAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA / CO No. A.Y Appellant Respondent No. 1 3026/Mum/2015 2010-11 Advance Enzyme ACIT, Circle – 1, 6th Floor, B Wing Technologies Pvt., Ltd., A Wing, 5th R.No. 22, Ashar IT Floor, Sun Park, Wagle INDL Magnetic, LIC Estate, Road No. Service Road, Louis 16Z, Wagle INDL Wadi, Thane West – Estate, Thane – 400604 400604. 2 3353/Mum/2017 2010-11 ACIT, Circle – 1, Advance Enzyme 6th Floor, B Wing Technologies Pvt. Ltd., A Wing, 5th R.No. 22, Ashar IT Park, Wagle INDL Floor, Sun Est…

Advanced Enzyme Technologies Ltd, Thane vs. Asst CIT Cir 1, Thane

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3026/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ramlal Negisl.

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Verma, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAMLAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA / CO No. A.Y Appellant Respondent No. 1 3026/Mum/2015 2010-11 Advance Enzyme ACIT, Circle – 1, 6th Floor, B Wing Technologies Pvt., Ltd., A Wing, 5th R.No. 22, Ashar IT Floor, Sun Park, Wagle INDL Magnetic, LIC Estate, Road No. Service Road, Louis 16Z, Wagle INDL Wadi, Thane West – Estate, Thane – 400604 400604. 2 3353/Mum/2017 2010-11 ACIT, Circle – 1, Advance Enzyme 6th Floor, B Wing Technologies Pvt. Ltd., A Wing, 5th R.No. 22, Ashar IT Park, Wagle INDL Floor, Sun Est…

Asst.C.I.T., Raichur vs. M/S Shilpa Medicare Ltd., Raichur

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for AY 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1373/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaran

For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)

…counsel for the assessee apart from relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Claris Life Science (supra) further placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sandan Vikas (India) Pvt. Ltd., 335 ITR 117 (Del) laying down identical proposition and also on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Banco Products (I) Ltd., 405 ITR 318 (Guj). 10. We have perused the aforesaid decisions and we find that in the case of Claris Lifesciences (supra), weighted deduction was claimed by the assessee in AY 2001-02 and the approval was re…