DCIT v. Ansysco

88 Taxmann.com 768Reported decision2017#21656 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 80ICSection 80A

Judgments citing DCIT v. Ansysco

BHAGWATI PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD- 4(4), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5991/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2015-16 Bhagwati Products Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit 697, Udyog Vihar Phase-5, Circle-23(1) Gurgaon, New Delhi. Haryana – 122 015. Pan: Aaccb1828N Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhagwati Products Pvt. Ltd., Ito, Ward 4(4), Plot No.21/14, Block-A, Phase Ii, New Delhi. Naraina Indl. Area, Delhi – 110 028. Pan: Aaccb1828N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate & Ms Supriya Mehta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. Dr & Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Dated Nil & 30.05.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or In Short Ld. ‘Faa’) In Appeal No.Cit(A), Delhi-42/10372/17-18 & 10390/18-19, Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR &
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Bhagwati Products Pvt. Ltd., Vs ACIT 697, Udyog Vihar Phase-5, Circle-23(1) Gurgaon, New Delhi. Haryana – 122 015. PAN: AACCB1828N Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhagwati Products Pvt. Ltd., ITO, Ward 4(4), Plot No.21/14, Block-A, Phase II, New Delhi. Naraina Indl. Area, Delhi – 110 028. PAN: AACCB1828N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate & Ms Supriya Mehta, CA Revenue by : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR & Shri Vivek Va…

BHAGWATI PRODUCTS PVT LTD,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-23(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5077/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2015-16 Bhagwati Products Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit 697, Udyog Vihar Phase-5, Circle-23(1) Gurgaon, New Delhi. Haryana – 122 015. Pan: Aaccb1828N Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhagwati Products Pvt. Ltd., Ito, Ward 4(4), Plot No.21/14, Block-A, Phase Ii, New Delhi. Naraina Indl. Area, Delhi – 110 028. Pan: Aaccb1828N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate & Ms Supriya Mehta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. Dr & Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Dated Nil & 30.05.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or In Short Ld. ‘Faa’) In Appeal No.Cit(A), Delhi-42/10372/17-18 & 10390/18-19, Respectively

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR &
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Bhagwati Products Pvt. Ltd., Vs ACIT 697, Udyog Vihar Phase-5, Circle-23(1) Gurgaon, New Delhi. Haryana – 122 015. PAN: AACCB1828N Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhagwati Products Pvt. Ltd., ITO, Ward 4(4), Plot No.21/14, Block-A, Phase II, New Delhi. Naraina Indl. Area, Delhi – 110 028. PAN: AACCB1828N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate & Ms Supriya Mehta, CA Revenue by : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR & Shri Vivek Va…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA LTD.,, HARYANA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1780/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Us, The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 21,56,490/- Made On Account Of Product Registration Expense & Not Considering The Findings Of The Ao. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.30,08,17,258/- Made On Account Of Reduction Of The Claim U/S. 80Ic Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, CIT-D.R
Section 40Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2009-10 Add CIT, Range-5, M/s. Reckitt Benchiser Ahmedabad Healthcare India Ltd. RB (Appellant) Vs House, Plot No. 48, Institution Area, Sector-32, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 PAN: AAACP9268J (Respondent) Assessment Year 2010-11 ACIT, M/s. Reckitt Benchiser Cir-5, Healthcare India Ltd. RB Ahmedabad Vs House, (Appellant) Plot No. 48, Institution Area, Sector-32, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 PAN: AAACP9268J (Respondent) Ass…

THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA LTD.,, HARYANA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1366/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Us, The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 21,56,490/- Made On Account Of Product Registration Expense & Not Considering The Findings Of The Ao. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.30,08,17,258/- Made On Account Of Reduction Of The Claim U/S. 80Ic Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, CIT-D.R
Section 40Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2009-10 Add CIT, Range-5, M/s. Reckitt Benchiser Ahmedabad Healthcare India Ltd. RB (Appellant) Vs House, Plot No. 48, Institution Area, Sector-32, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 PAN: AAACP9268J (Respondent) Assessment Year 2010-11 ACIT, M/s. Reckitt Benchiser Cir-5, Healthcare India Ltd. RB Ahmedabad Vs House, (Appellant) Plot No. 48, Institution Area, Sector-32, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 PAN: AAACP9268J (Respondent) Ass…

DCIT v. Ansysco (88 Taxmann.com 768) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax