PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.

397 ITR 681High Court2017#1367 most cited

What is PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. authority for?

For claiming weighted deduction under section 35(2AB), the existence of recognition for a Research and Development (R&D) Centre is relevant, not necessarily the date of approval or recognition.

84

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd v. Union of India · section 35(2AB) · weighted deduction · R&D expenditure · recognition of R&D centre · DSIR approval · eligibility for deduction

Also reported as

129 Taxmann.com 163

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 68Section 143(3)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 292BSection 142(1)Section 132
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(7)section 133(a)section 80ia(4)(iii)section 161section 159section 167section 2(31)warrant of authorisationsection 39section 292blegal representativetransferor company

Judgments citing PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.

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…

Basf India Ltd ( As Successor to Basf Polyurethanes India Ltd in Terms of the Scheme of Amalagamation Between Basf India Ltd and Basf Polyurethanes India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 6(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 278/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…that once a company merges with another company by virtue of a scheme of amalgamation, it will lose its existence after such merger. The aforesaid view expressed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court was again reiterated in PCIT v/s Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., [2017] 397 ITR 681 (Del.). While affirming the view expressed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (supra) and Spice Entertainment Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the order passed in 5 BASF India Ltd. A.Y. 2008–09 respect of a non–existing entity is invalid. While doing so, the Hon'ble Supreme Court also upheld the view exp…

DCIT 9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Glint Infraporjects P.Ltd (Keystone Stockfin Private Limited Merged in Glint Infraprojects Private Limited), Mumbai

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

ITA 5758/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Choudhary Arunkumar Singh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Joshi, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 68

…High Court, while affirming 7 CO No.133/M/2019 M/s. Glint Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. this view of the Tribunal followed its own decision for AY 2011-12 in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax --6, New Delhi v Maruti Suzuki India Limited (successor of SPIL[2017] 397 ITR 681 (Del.)5("Maruti Suzuki") . Holding that no question of law arose, the High Court dismissed the appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961” 11. In the present case also the re-assessment proceedings and the consequent assessment have been framed in the name of entity which is no more existent as the same stood merged with the new entity…

Sabras Investment & Trading Co. Ltd ( Now Merged With Tata Chemicals Ltd), Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 872/MUM/2013[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 1999-00

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 915/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 916/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 917/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 918/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 869/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 870/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 871/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 872/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, DR
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)

…ers & Shareholders (348 ITR 336 (Bom)] -Ashok Vardhan Birla Vs. CIT [208 ITR 958 (Bom.)] -Inaroo Vs. CIT (204 ITR 312 (Bom)] -CIT vs. Govindram Bros. P. Ltd (141 ITR 626 (Bom)] 6 | P a g e ITA Nso.915 to 918/Mum/2012 & 869 to 872/Mum/2013 -Maruti Suzuki Ltd. 397 ITR 681 (Del)” 4. The learned Counsel for the assessee in support of his above argument also stated that on identical set of facts, the ITAT has admitted similar additional grounds in the case of its group concerns in the following cases: - “Tata Sons Ltd. V. ACIT (2016) 76 taxmann.com 126 (Mum ITAT) Tata Sons Ltd. V. ACIT (ITA No. 2639/Mum/2009) (Mum IT…

Sabras Investment & Trading Co. Ltd ( Now Merged With Tata Chemicals Ltd), Mumbai vs. JCIT Sp RG, 1, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 871/MUM/2013[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 1998-99

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 915/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 916/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 917/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 918/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 869/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 870/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 871/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 872/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, DR
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)

…ers & Shareholders (348 ITR 336 (Bom)] -Ashok Vardhan Birla Vs. CIT [208 ITR 958 (Bom.)] -Inaroo Vs. CIT (204 ITR 312 (Bom)] -CIT vs. Govindram Bros. P. Ltd (141 ITR 626 (Bom)] 6 | P a g e ITA Nso.915 to 918/Mum/2012 & 869 to 872/Mum/2013 -Maruti Suzuki Ltd. 397 ITR 681 (Del)” 4. The learned Counsel for the assessee in support of his above argument also stated that on identical set of facts, the ITAT has admitted similar additional grounds in the case of its group concerns in the following cases: - “Tata Sons Ltd. V. ACIT (2016) 76 taxmann.com 126 (Mum ITAT) Tata Sons Ltd. V. ACIT (ITA No. 2639/Mum/2009) (Mum IT…

Sabras Investment & Trading Co. Ltd ( Now Merged With Tata Chemicals Ltd), Mumbai vs. JCIT Sp RG, 1, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 870/MUM/2013[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 1997-98

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 915/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 916/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 917/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 918/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 869/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 870/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 871/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 872/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, DR
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)

…ers & Shareholders (348 ITR 336 (Bom)] -Ashok Vardhan Birla Vs. CIT [208 ITR 958 (Bom.)] -Inaroo Vs. CIT (204 ITR 312 (Bom)] -CIT vs. Govindram Bros. P. Ltd (141 ITR 626 (Bom)] 6 | P a g e ITA Nso.915 to 918/Mum/2012 & 869 to 872/Mum/2013 -Maruti Suzuki Ltd. 397 ITR 681 (Del)” 4. The learned Counsel for the assessee in support of his above argument also stated that on identical set of facts, the ITAT has admitted similar additional grounds in the case of its group concerns in the following cases: - “Tata Sons Ltd. V. ACIT (2016) 76 taxmann.com 126 (Mum ITAT) Tata Sons Ltd. V. ACIT (ITA No. 2639/Mum/2009) (Mum IT…

Sabras Investment & Trading P.Ltd ( Now Merged With Tata Chemicals Ltd), Mumbai vs. JCIT Sp RG, 1, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 869/MUM/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 1996-97

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 915/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 916/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 917/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 918/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 869/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 870/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 871/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 872/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, DR
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)

…ers & Shareholders (348 ITR 336 (Bom)] -Ashok Vardhan Birla Vs. CIT [208 ITR 958 (Bom.)] -Inaroo Vs. CIT (204 ITR 312 (Bom)] -CIT vs. Govindram Bros. P. Ltd (141 ITR 626 (Bom)] 6 | P a g e ITA Nso.915 to 918/Mum/2012 & 869 to 872/Mum/2013 -Maruti Suzuki Ltd. 397 ITR 681 (Del)” 4. The learned Counsel for the assessee in support of his above argument also stated that on identical set of facts, the ITAT has admitted similar additional grounds in the case of its group concerns in the following cases: - “Tata Sons Ltd. V. ACIT (2016) 76 taxmann.com 126 (Mum ITAT) Tata Sons Ltd. V. ACIT (ITA No. 2639/Mum/2009) (Mum IT…

Sabras Investment & Trading Co. Ltd ( Now Merged With Tata Chemical Ltd), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 918/MUM/2012[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 1999-00

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 915/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 916/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 917/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 918/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 869/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 870/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 871/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 872/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, DR
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)

…ers & Shareholders (348 ITR 336 (Bom)] -Ashok Vardhan Birla Vs. CIT [208 ITR 958 (Bom.)] -Inaroo Vs. CIT (204 ITR 312 (Bom)] -CIT vs. Govindram Bros. P. Ltd (141 ITR 626 (Bom)] 6 | P a g e ITA Nso.915 to 918/Mum/2012 & 869 to 872/Mum/2013 -Maruti Suzuki Ltd. 397 ITR 681 (Del)” 4. The learned Counsel for the assessee in support of his above argument also stated that on identical set of facts, the ITAT has admitted similar additional grounds in the case of its group concerns in the following cases: - “Tata Sons Ltd. V. ACIT (2016) 76 taxmann.com 126 (Mum ITAT) Tata Sons Ltd. V. ACIT (ITA No. 2639/Mum/2009) (Mum IT…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited

C.A. No.-005409-005409 - 2019Supreme Court25 Jul 2019

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 92C

…ent Ltd. (Civil Appeal No. 285 of 2014 etc. etc.), this special leave petition also stands dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.” 2 “SPIL” 3 “AY” 4 “MSIL” 5 (2017) 397 ITR 681 (DEL.) 6 “The Act 1961” 7 SLP (C) Diary No. 14106 of 2018 3 On behalf of the respondent, it has been urged that in view of the dismissal of the Special Leave Petition in relation to AY 2011-12, the same course of action must follow in the present case which deals with the assessment for AY 2012-13. 4 We have heard submissions on b…

Mr.Venkatareddy Manjunath, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 798/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 147Section 148Section 149

…regularities which could be cured and not in case where there is lack of jurisdiction in the following decisions:- (i) V. Ramaiah v. CIT, 356 ITR 656 (Mad) (ii) Monga Metals (P) Ltd. v. ACIT [2000] 111 Taxman 175 (Mag.) (iii) PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., 397 ITR 681 (Del) (iv) CIT v. Norton Motors, 275 ITR 595 (P&H) 22. For the reasons given above, we hold that reassessment proceedings in the case of both the assessees are invalid and are liable to be annulled and are accordingly annulled. 23. In view of the aforesaid decision, the other disputes raised by the assessees in their appeals do not require any co…

Dr. V. Sudarshini, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 741/BANG/2018[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 147Section 148Section 149

…regularities which could be cured and not in case where there is lack of jurisdiction in the following decisions:- (i) V. Ramaiah v. CIT, 356 ITR 656 (Mad) (ii) Monga Metals (P) Ltd. v. ACIT [2000] 111 Taxman 175 (Mag.) (iii) PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., 397 ITR 681 (Del) (iv) CIT v. Norton Motors, 275 ITR 595 (P&H) 22. For the reasons given above, we hold that reassessment proceedings in the case of both the assessees are invalid and are liable to be annulled and are accordingly annulled. 23. In view of the aforesaid decision, the other disputes raised by the assessees in their appeals do not require any co…

Smt B A Indiramma, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 1203/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 147Section 148Section 149

…regularities which could be cured and not in case where there is lack of jurisdiction in the following decisions:- (i) V. Ramaiah v. CIT, 356 ITR 656 (Mad) (ii) Monga Metals (P) Ltd. v. ACIT [2000] 111 Taxman 175 (Mag.) (iii) PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., 397 ITR 681 (Del) (iv) CIT v. Norton Motors, 275 ITR 595 (P&H) 22. For the reasons given above, we hold that reassessment proceedings in the case of both the assessees are invalid and are liable to be annulled and are accordingly annulled. 23. In view of the aforesaid decision, the other disputes raised by the assessees in their appeals do not require any co…

Whirlpool of India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee for Assessment Year 2011-12

ITA 7085/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2010-11 Ay: 2011-12 Ay: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I Bara, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 92BSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: Bench ‘I-1’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2010-11 AY: 2011-12 AY: 2012-13 Whirlpool of India Ltd. vs. DCIT, LTU Plot No.40, Sector – 44 New Delhi Gurgaon 122 002 PAN: AAACW1336L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Mr. Ramit Katyal, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. Sanjay I Bara, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 08/01/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 18/01/2019 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order…

M/S. Whirlpool of India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee for Assessment Year 2011-12

ITA 1787/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2010-11 Ay: 2011-12 Ay: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I Bara, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 92BSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: Bench ‘I-1’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2010-11 AY: 2011-12 AY: 2012-13 Whirlpool of India Ltd. vs. DCIT, LTU Plot No.40, Sector – 44 New Delhi Gurgaon 122 002 PAN: AAACW1336L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Mr. Ramit Katyal, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. Sanjay I Bara, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 08/01/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 18/01/2019 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order…

M/S. Whirlpool of India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee for Assessment Year 2011-12

ITA 1972/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2010-11 Ay: 2011-12 Ay: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I Bara, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 92BSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: Bench ‘I-1’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2010-11 AY: 2011-12 AY: 2012-13 Whirlpool of India Ltd. vs. DCIT, LTU Plot No.40, Sector – 44 New Delhi Gurgaon 122 002 PAN: AAACW1336L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Mr. Ramit Katyal, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. Sanjay I Bara, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 08/01/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 18/01/2019 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Serum Institute of India Ltd., Pune

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

ITA 934/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.549 & 550/PUN/2016 अ…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Serum Institute of India Ltd., Pune

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

ITA 607/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.549 & 550/PUN/2016 अ…

Serum Institute of India Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

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

ITA 550/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.549 & 550/PUN/2016 अ…

Serum Institute of India Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

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

ITA 549/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Rajshekhar S. AbhyankarFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 35

…पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “ए” पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे म"म"म"म" आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे पुणे पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी "ी डी "ी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव , लेखा राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी "ी िवकास "ी िवकास अव"थी अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" एवं एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / ITA Nos.549 & 550/PUN/2016 अ…