Grasim Industries Ltd. v. Collector of Customs

2002 SCC OnLine SC 413Reported decision2002#15295 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

section 92ca(3a)section 3a section 92ca(4)transfer pricing order section 92ca(1)eligible assessee section 153(1)section 92b section 144c(1)section 144c(5)section 92ca(3)section 153b

Judgments citing Grasim Industries Ltd. v. Collector of Customs

ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 162/AHD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 162/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 92BSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 162/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17) Zydus Lifesciences Ltd. (i) The Additional बनाम/ (Formerly Known as /Joint/Deputy/ Assistant Vs. Cadila Healthcare Ltd.), Commissioner of Income 4th Floor, D wing, Zydus Tax, Corporate Park, Scheme National e-Assessment No.63, Survey No. 536, Centre, Delhi Khoraj (Gandhinagar), Nr. (ii) DCIT, Circle – Vaishnodevi Circle, S.G. 1(1)(1), Highway, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/G…

ATOS INDIA PRIVATE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 14 (1) (1) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed on the additional grounds

ITA 1576/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleatos India Private Limited V. Acit – 14(1)(1) Unit No. 1401, 14Th Floor Rom No. 481, 4Th Floor Supremus “E" Wing Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 I Think Techno Campus Kanjurmarg (E), Mumbai - 400042 Pan: Aaaco2461J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Chandni Shah & Ms. Riddi Maru Department Represented By : Shri Vachaspati Tripathi

Section 144C(5)

…urts to treat any word(s) as redundant or superfluous and ignore the same. In this connection, it is pertinent to note the judgment of the Apex Court in Grasim Industries Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, [(2002) 4 Page No. 9 Atos India Private Limited SCC 297 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 413], wherein, it was held as follows: "10. No words or expressions used in any statute can be said to be redundant or superfluous. In matters of interpretation one should not concentrate too much on one word and pay too little attention to other words. No provision in the statute and no word in any section can be construed in isolation. E…

FROST & SULLIVAN (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 9(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1259/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘K’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Frost & Sullivan Vs. Dy. Commissioner of (India) Private Limited Income Tax, 4th Floor, Tower VI, Circle – 9(3)(2) Solitaire Corporate Park Mumbai Opp. Sahar Cargo Complex, Chakala Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 093 PAN/GIR No.AAACF4252A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Frost & Sullivan (India) Income Tax, Private Limited Circle – 9(3)(2) 4th Floor, Tower VI, Solitaire Mumbai Corporate Park Opp. Sahar Cargo Complex, Chakala Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 093 PA…

DCIT 9(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. FROST AND SULLIVAN (INDIA) P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1148/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92Section 92C

STRIDES ARCOLAB LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 10(3),

ITA 2877/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.2877/Mum/2014 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Strides Shasun Limited Dcit Cir. 15(3)(2) (Formerly Known As R. No. 451, 4Th Floor, Strides Arcolab Limited) बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 201, Devavrata, Sector 17, Road, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Vashi, Navi Mumbai – 400 703 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aadcs8104P (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Percy Pardiwala/ Shri Ketan Ved /Shri Ninad Patade, Ld. Ars प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Vatsalaa Jha, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 18.01.2023 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla : The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.02.2014 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) In 2

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala/ ShriFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha, Ld. DR

Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153Section 234BSection 234DSection 30Section 35Section 40A(2)(b)

…preting a statute, it is not for the courts to treat any word(s) as redundant or superfluous and ignore the same. In this connection, it is pertinent to note the judgment of the Apex Court in Grasim Industries Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, [(2002) 4 SCC 297 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 413], wherein, it was held as follows: “10. No words or expressions used in any statute can be said to be redundant or superfluous. In matters of interpretation one should not concentrate too much on one word and pay too little attention to other words. No provision in the statute and no word in any section can be construed in isolation. E…

ATOS INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed on the additional grounds

ITA 1795/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1795/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-14(1)1), Atos India Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan Godrej & Boyce Complex, बनाम/ Mumbai Plant 5, Pirojshanagar, Vs. Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400079 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaaco2461J (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Dhanesh Bafna /Chandni Sha /Riddhi Maru /Kinjal Patel, Ld. Ars प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Yogesh Kamat, Ld. Dr सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ 01.06.2022 & : 25.01.2023 Date Of Hearing घोर्णधकीतधरीख / : 23.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: 1. The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) In 2

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh BafnaFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 40Section 40(3)Section 48Section 4oSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, PRESIDENT & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1795/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) DCIT-14(1)1), Atos India Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan Godrej & Boyce Complex, बनाम/ Mumbai Plant 5, Pirojshanagar, Vs. LBS Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400079 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AAACO2461J (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Dhanesh Bafna /Chandni Sha /Riddhi Maru /Kinjal Patel, Ld. ARs प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Yogesh Kamat, Ld. DR सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ 01.06.2022 &…