Dy. CIT v. PHL Pharma (P.) Ltd.

78 Taxmann.com 36Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2017#3135 most cited

What is Dy. CIT v. PHL Pharma (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Pharmaceutical companies are not subject to the Medical Council of India (MCI) guidelines concerning freebies given to doctors. Consequently, expenses on such freebies are not disallowed under Explanation 1 to Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act.

38

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Dy. CIT v. PHL Pharma (P.) Ltd. · Section 37(1) · freebies to doctors · MCI guidelines · CBDT Circular 5/2012 · pharmaceutical companies · revenue expenditure · medical practitioners

Also reported as

163 ITD 10

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1) of the Income Tax ActSection 131 of the Income Tax ActSection 133(6) of the Income Tax ActSection 133A of the Income Tax ActSection 23 of the Contract Act

Issues it is cited on

freebies to doctorsexplanation to section 37section 135prohibited by lawretracted statementsection 30commercial expediencyprofits and gains of business or professiontnmmrevenue expenditurecapital expendituresection 37(1)

Judgments citing Dy. CIT v. PHL Pharma (P.) Ltd.

Asst Commissioner of Income Tax Cen Cir 7(2), Mumbai vs. Hegde and Hegde Pharmaceutica LLP, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 2438/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash Bairagra, a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 37(1)

…red by the MCI guidelines and consequently by 33 Hegde and Hegde Pharmaceutica LLP (batch) Explanation 1 to sec.37(1) of the Act. In this regard, the assessee has relied upon the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. PHL Pharma Ltd (2017)(163 ITD 10)(Mum), wherein the Tribunal had allowed the deduction of conference registration charges. 6.7. We notice that the decision in the case of PHL Pharma Ltd (supra) was rendered by the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in 2017, much prior to the decision rendered by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Apex Laboratories P Ltd, while the decision in th…

Asst Commissioner of Income Tax Cent Cir. 7(2), Mumbai vs. Hegde and Hegde Pharmaceutica LLP, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 2433/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash Bairagra, a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 37(1)

…red by the MCI guidelines and consequently by 33 Hegde and Hegde Pharmaceutica LLP (batch) Explanation 1 to sec.37(1) of the Act. In this regard, the assessee has relied upon the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. PHL Pharma Ltd (2017)(163 ITD 10)(Mum), wherein the Tribunal had allowed the deduction of conference registration charges. 6.7. We notice that the decision in the case of PHL Pharma Ltd (supra) was rendered by the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in 2017, much prior to the decision rendered by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Apex Laboratories P Ltd, while the decision in th…

Hegde and Hegde Pharmaceutica LLP, Kemps Corner vs. DCIT Central Circle- 7(2), New Marine Lines

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 1892/MUM/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash Bairagra, a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 37(1)

…red by the MCI guidelines and consequently by 33 Hegde and Hegde Pharmaceutica LLP (batch) Explanation 1 to sec.37(1) of the Act. In this regard, the assessee has relied upon the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. PHL Pharma Ltd (2017)(163 ITD 10)(Mum), wherein the Tribunal had allowed the deduction of conference registration charges. 6.7. We notice that the decision in the case of PHL Pharma Ltd (supra) was rendered by the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in 2017, much prior to the decision rendered by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Apex Laboratories P Ltd, while the decision in th…

Hegde and Hegde Pharmaceutica LLP, Kemps Corner vs. DCIT Central Circle- 7(2), New Marine Lines

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 1889/MUM/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash Bairagra, a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 37(1)

…red by the MCI guidelines and consequently by 33 Hegde and Hegde Pharmaceutica LLP (batch) Explanation 1 to sec.37(1) of the Act. In this regard, the assessee has relied upon the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. PHL Pharma Ltd (2017)(163 ITD 10)(Mum), wherein the Tribunal had allowed the deduction of conference registration charges. 6.7. We notice that the decision in the case of PHL Pharma Ltd (supra) was rendered by the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in 2017, much prior to the decision rendered by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Apex Laboratories P Ltd, while the decision in th…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Troikaa Pharmaceuticlas Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 939/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R
Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

…lant relied upon the judgment of ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of Cadila Pharmaceutical Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2017) 85 Taxmann.com 354, and Sunflower Pharmacy reported in 88 Taxman.com 326 (Ahd-Trib) and judgment of Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in the case of PHL Pharma P. Ltd. 78 Taxmann.com 36 (2017). The ARs of the Appellant contended that MCI guidelines are not applicable to the pharma companies but are applicable only to professional doctors in practice. Reliance was placed on decisions of Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad and Mumbai ITAT in the cases referred herein above wherein it has been held that Medical Council of India Regulatio…

The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1129/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R
Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

…lant relied upon the judgment of ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of Cadila Pharmaceutical Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2017) 85 Taxmann.com 354, and Sunflower Pharmacy reported in 88 Taxman.com 326 (Ahd-Trib) and judgment of Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in the case of PHL Pharma P. Ltd. 78 Taxmann.com 36 (2017). The ARs of the Appellant contended that MCI guidelines are not applicable to the pharma companies but are applicable only to professional doctors in practice. Reliance was placed on decisions of Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad and Mumbai ITAT in the cases referred herein above wherein it has been held that Medical Council of India Regulatio…

Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) Circle-8, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1285/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1285 & 1286/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 & Ita No.1396 & 1397/Ahd/2018 Asstt.Year 2011-12 & 2012-13 Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Acit, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent House Ahmedabad. Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1327 & 1328/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1414 & 1415/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Ahmedabad. Torrent House Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Choksi, With Shri Biren Shah, Ars. Revenue By : Shri Mohd. Usman, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/11/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, With Shri Biren Shah, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 35Section 80Section 92C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA.No.1285 and 1286/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 and 2010-11 AND ITA No.1396 and 1397/Ahd/2018 Asstt.Year 2011-12 and 2012-13 Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. ACIT, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent House Ahmedabad. Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. आयकर अपील सं./ITA.No.1327 and 1328/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2009-10 and 2010-11 AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA.No.1414 and 1415/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-12…

M/S. Fdc Limited, Mumbai vs. Addll. CIT- 8 (1), Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 6901/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6901/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6840/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Fdc Limited Acit Circle– 8(1) बिाम/ 142-48, S. V. Road {Now Acit Circle 9(3)(1)} Jogeshwari (West) R. No. 215, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Mumbai – 400 102 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacf-0253-H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.7016/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Circle– 8(1) M/S Fdc Limited बिाम/ {Now Acit Circle 9(3)(1)} 142-48, S. V. Road R. No. 215, Aayakar Bhavan Jogeshwari (West) Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 102 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacf-0253-H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri S. S. Nagar, Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Sunil Deshpande, Ld. Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 20/07/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 08/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 92C

…l companies. Further CBDT circular enlarging the scope of Indian Medical Council Regulation, 2002 could not be reckoned to have a retrospective effect. In this decision, the bench has referred to another decision of Tribunal in DCIT V/s PHL Pharma Ltd. [2017; 78 Taxmann.com 36). In the decision of ICPA Health Product Ltd. (ITA Nos.6244- 45/M/2017;20/04/2018) it has been held by the bench as under: "The expenditure on distributing glass, face mask, pen, writing pad, towel set, wall clock, paper cups except Voltas Cooler and stabilizer cannot be regarded as freebies given to doctors. Hence except the cost of Voltas…

Bristol-Myers Squibb India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir. 6(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 5157/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5157/Mum/2016 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Bristol-Myers Squibb India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-6(1) बिाम/ Indiabulls Finance Centre Mumbai. 6Th Floor, Tower-1, Senapati Bapat Marg Vs. Elphinstone West, Mumbai-400 013 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaccb-4313-Q (अपीलाथी/Appellant) : (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5035Mum/2016 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-6(1) Bristol-Myers Squibb India Pvt. Ltd. बिाम/ Mumbai. Indiabulls Finance Centre 6Th Floor, Tower-1, Senapati Bapat Marg Vs. Elphinstone West, Mumbai-400 013 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaccb-4313-Q (अपीलाथी/Appellant) : (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Jehangir Mistri-Ld. Sr. Counsel प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Sunil Deshpande & Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra-Ld.Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 09/06/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 01/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir Mistri-Ld. Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande & Shri Sushil
Section 143(3)Section 253Section 92Section 92BSection 92F

…ture. The amount so expanded would be an allowable deduction u/s 37(1). Few of such decisions could be enumerated as follows:- (i) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Max Hospital Pitampura (WPC No.1334 of 2014 10/01/2014 (ii) Mumbai Tribunal in PHL Pharma Pvt. Ltd. (78 Taxmann.com 36) (iii) Mumbai Tribunal in Syncom Formulations (I) Ltd. (ITA Nos. 6428-29/Mum/2012 23/12/2015) (iv) Mumbai Tribunal in Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.1104/Mum/2018 15/01/2020) (v) Mumbai Tribunal in Aristo Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. (ITA Nos.6680/Mum/2012 & ors. 26/07/2018) (vi) Mumbai Tribunal in JB Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd.…

Ajanta Pharma Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-7(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4785/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.4784 & 4785/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/S Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-Tax-Central Circle 6(2),19Th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (West), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. Pan No. Aaaca5579P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT D.R
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

…M/s Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No.4784 & 4785/MUM/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/s Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-tax-Central Circle 6(2),19th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (west), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. PAN No. AAACA5579P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior Advocate Re…

Ajanta Pharma Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-7(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4784/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.4784 & 4785/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/S Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-Tax-Central Circle 6(2),19Th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (West), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. Pan No. Aaaca5579P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT D.R
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

…M/s Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA No.4784 & 4785/MUM/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/s Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-tax-Central Circle 6(2),19th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (west), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. PAN No. AAACA5579P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior Advocate Re…

M/S.Srl Diagnostics Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner Income Tax-7, Mumbai

Accordingly, the grounds raised by assessee are allowed

ITA 1528/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri R. L. Negi, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1528/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan & Shri SFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan, DR
Section 14ASection 263Section 37

…asis. 19. Fifth Submission: 19.1. He submitted that the correctness of Circular No 5 of 2012 was dealt with by this Hon'ble Tribunal in Solvay Pharma India Ltd v. PCIT E20181 192 TTJ 394 (Mum).Again, the Mumbai Tribunal in DCIT v. PHL Pharma (P.) Ltd [2017] 163 ITD 10 (Mum) held that Circular No 5 of 2012 is applicable for medical practitioners only and the censure/action which has been suggested by it is only on medical practitioners and not for pharmaceutical companies or allied health sector industries. 21 I.T.A. No. 1528/Mum/2018 M/s SRL Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. Further, he relied on: Cadila Pharmaceuticals…

Raman & Weil P Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-1(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 993/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Raman & Weil P. Dcit -1(3)(1), Ltd., Mumbai 36-37, Mittal Chambers Vs. Opp. Inox Theatre, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aaacr5065M (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Vijay Jaiswal, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 20.10.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.11.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Relevant To Assessment Year 20114-15. 2. The Issue Raised In First Ground Of Appeal Is Against The Confirmation Of Disallowance Of Sales Promotion Expenses Being Gifts To Doctors & Hospitals Amounting To Rs.10,76,256/-.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Jaiswal, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Raman & Weil P. DCIT -1(3)(1), Ltd., Mumbai 36-37, Mittal Chambers Vs. Opp. Inox Theatre, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 PAN: AAACR5065M (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Vijay Jaiswal, D.R. Date of Hearing : 20.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 27.10.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 26.11.2018 of the Co…

Indoco Remedies Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-6(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6532/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Ms. Samatha Mullamudi
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 35Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.6532/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) ITA no.6533/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2014–15) Indoco Remedies Ltd. 166, CST Road, Santacruz (E) ……………. Appellant Mumbai 400 098 PAN – AAACI0380C v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–6(1), Mumbai ITA no.4591/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Central Circle–6(1), Mumbai v/s Indoco Remedies Ltd. 166, CST Road, Santacruz (E) ……………. Respondent Mu…

M/S. Peerless Hospitex Hospital & Research Centre Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11(2), Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of the assessee( in ITA No

ITA 738/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.737 & 738/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Shri S. Dey, CA & Ms. Puja Somani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 154Section 72

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.737 & 738/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2013-14) M/s Peerless Hospitex Hospital & Vs. DCIT, Circle-11(2), Kolkata 360, Panchsayar, Kolkata-700084 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AABCP 7225 L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Shri S. Dey, CA & Ms. Puja Somani, CA Respondent by :Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 15/10/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 11/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L…

M/S. Peerless Hospitex Hospital & Research Centre Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11(2), Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of the assessee( in ITA No

ITA 737/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.737 & 738/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Shri S. Dey, CA & Ms. Puja Somani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 154Section 72

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.737 & 738/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2013-14) M/s Peerless Hospitex Hospital & Vs. DCIT, Circle-11(2), Kolkata 360, Panchsayar, Kolkata-700084 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AABCP 7225 L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Shri S. Dey, CA & Ms. Puja Somani, CA Respondent by :Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 15/10/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 11/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L…

Shri Vasant Vashrambhai Sapovadia, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Assistant Commr. Income Tax, Cir-3, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 32/RJT/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Das, DR
Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.32/Rjt/2016 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Vasant Vashrambhai Sapovadia Vs. The Asst.CIT Netradeep Eye Hospital Pvt.Ltd. Cir-3 Kanak Road Rajkot B/h. S.T. Station Rajkot [PAN No. AJBPS 3164 K] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Written Submission Respondent by : Shri Anil Kumar Das, DR Date of Hearing 19/09/2019 Date of Pronouncement 22/ 10 /2019 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance o…

The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. La Renon Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, all the revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 3327/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Jayant Jhaveri, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2380/Ahd/2015 2011-12 ACIT, M/s. La Renon Halthcare Circle – 2(1)(2), Pvt. Ltd., 208 Iscon Ahmedabad – 380 009 Elegance, Circle-P, Prahladnagar, S. G. Highway, Ahmedabad- 380 006. (PAN : AABCL 3431 G) 2. 3327/Ahd/2016 2012-13 Dy. CIT, --do-- Circle – 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad – 380 014. 3. 1811/Ahd/2017 2013-14 ACIT, --do-- Circle – 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad 4. 1812/Ahd/2017 2014-15 --do-- --do--…

The Dy. CIT, (OSD)-I, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. La Renon Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, all the revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 2380/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Jayant Jhaveri, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asstt. Appeal(s) by Nos. Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2380/Ahd/2015 2011-12 ACIT, M/s. La Renon Halthcare Circle – 2(1)(2), Pvt. Ltd., 208 Iscon Ahmedabad – 380 009 Elegance, Circle-P, Prahladnagar, S. G. Highway, Ahmedabad- 380 006. (PAN : AABCL 3431 G) 2. 3327/Ahd/2016 2012-13 Dy. CIT, --do-- Circle – 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad – 380 014. 3. 1811/Ahd/2017 2013-14 ACIT, --do-- Circle – 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad 4. 1812/Ahd/2017 2014-15 --do-- --do--…

India Medtronic Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, 10(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7263/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodindia Medtronics Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner 1241, Solitaire Corporate Park, Of Income-Tax-10(1)(1), Bldg. No.12, 4Th Floor, Andheri Room No. 209, Vs. Ghatkopar Link Road, Aayakar Bhavan,M.K. Road Andheri (E), Mumbai, Mumbai – 400020 Maharashtra- 400093 Pan – Aaaci4227Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: S/Shri Rajan R. Vora & Nikhil Tiwari, A.Rs Respondent By: Shri Anand Mohan, D.R Date Of Hearing: 11.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.09.2019

For Appellant: S/shri Rajan R. Vora &For Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92B

…ld. A.R that the Tribunal after relying on the decision of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of MAX Hospital., Pitampura Vs. Medical Council of India [CWP No. 1334/2013, dated 10.01.2014] and the order of the ITAT, Mumbai, in the case of PHL Pharma (163 ITD 10) (Mum), had concluded viz. (i) that, the MCI guidelines are applicable only to the professionals i.e the doctors and do not govern the other tax entities or individuals other than the doctors; and (ii) that, as MCI only regulates the professional conduct of its members i.e doctors, therefore, any guidelines issued by it would have no bearing as re…

Dy. CIT v. PHL Pharma (P.) Ltd. (78 Taxmann.com 36) — Cited in 38 Judgments | BharatTax