Dr. Mrs. Renuka Datla v. Solvay Pharmaceutical

265 ITR 435Supreme Court of India2004#20208 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 365,804 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 11UASection 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)

Judgments citing Dr. Mrs. Renuka Datla v. Solvay Pharmaceutical

DCIT, CC-20, Delhi vs. Weldon Polymers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1868/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Gs Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv. and Shri Utkarsh Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr
Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68A

…ies Ltd. v. State of U.P. and Ors. 2000 ECR 19 (SC) vi. Securities & Exchange Board of India & Ors. [2015 ABR 291- (Bombay HC)] vii. DQ (International ) Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA 151/Hyd/ 2015) viii. RenukaDatla (Mrs. ) v. Solvay Pharmaceuticals B.V. and ors. [2004] 265 ITR 435 (SC) Page 11 of 13 ITA No.- 1868/Del/2021 M/s Weldon Polymers Pvt. Ltd. ix. CIT Vs VVA Hotels Private Limited (Madras High Court) T.C.A. No. 670 of 2019 x. Bharat Hari Singhania & Others vs. Commissioner of Wealth Tax & Others 207 ITR 1 (SC) xi. Cinestann Entertainment P. Ltd. vs. ITO (2019) (177 ITD 809) (Delhi) xii. DCIT vs. Pali Fabrics P. L…

DCIT, Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Microfirm Capital Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 963/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey]

Section 14ASection 250Section 56(2)(viib)

…r to an expert. For the proposition that the Assessing Officer cannot interfere with the valuation made by a valuer, who is an expert, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Mrs. Renuka Datla Vs. Solvay Pharmaceutical (2004) 265 ITR 435 (SC) and the case of C.A. No. 5929 of 1997 Duncans Industries Ltd. vs. State of U.P. and Ors.. He further submitted that Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act, seeks to bring notional income to tax and hence strict interpretation has to be given and no income can be brought to tax unless the definite and concrete findings are brought about by the revenu…

M/S. Microfirm Capital Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-8(1), Kolkata

In the result, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 513/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey]

Section 14ASection 250Section 56(2)(viib)

…r to an expert. For the proposition that the Assessing Officer cannot interfere with the valuation made by a valuer, who is an expert, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Mrs. Renuka Datla Vs. Solvay Pharmaceutical (2004) 265 ITR 435 (SC) and the case of C.A. No. 5929 of 1997 Duncans Industries Ltd. vs. State of U.P. and Ors.. He further submitted that Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act, seeks to bring notional income to tax and hence strict interpretation has to be given and no income can be brought to tax unless the definite and concrete findings are brought about by the revenu…

ITO 25(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Pankaj Enterprises, Mumbai

ITA 5238/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singhआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./5238/Mum/2013, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year:2010-11 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income Tax Officer-25(2)(2) M/S. Pankaj Enterprises 46-A, 2Nd Floor, Ganjawala Apt. No.2 C-11 Bldg., Room No.106, Pratyakshakar Vs. Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Ganjawala Lane,Borivali(W),Mumbai-92. Mumbai-400 051. Pan:Aaafp 2176 J (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" Revenue By: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang-Dr Assessee By: None सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30.06.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 13.07.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order,Dated 10.05.2013,Of The Cit (A)-35, Mumbai, The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Has Filed The Present Appeal.None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee .We Are Deciding The Appeal On Merits After Hearing The Departmental Representative (Dr).

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang-DR
Section 133Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

…TL,NE, Neelam,DSC,SVC, reflecting the payment made to various venders for the purchases affected for the year under consideration. The assessee referred to the cases of Nikunj Eximps Enterprises Private Limited (ITA No.5604 of 2010),Leaders Valves (P)Limited (265 ITR 435), M.K.Brothers (163 ITR 249). It was further argued that the full details of purchases were submited during the course of assessment, that the purchase invoices showed addresses of the sellers, description of the goods,that the payments were made by the cheques, that the AO himself had agreed that 2 5238/M/13-Pankaj purchases of the assessee, p…

Dr. Mrs. Renuka Datla v. Solvay Pharmaceutical (265 ITR 435) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax