PCP Chemicals Pvt Ltd. v. ITO

168 ITD 26Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2017#19532 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2020.

Judgments citing PCP Chemicals Pvt Ltd. v. ITO

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

…35(1) of the Act, cannot take advantage of Sec. 35(2AB) of the Act, simultaneously. The Ld. DR has argued the issue at length in light of various judicial precedents, including the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of PCP Chemicals Pvt Ltd., VS. ITO (2017) 168 ITD 26 and M/s Nivo Controls Pvt Ltd., Vs. CIT (2018) 169 ITD 139, and submitted that the Tribunal has categorically held that, in order to get the benefit of weighted deduction the approval of R&D facility from the competent authority and necessary approval form in form 3CM is mandatory. In absence of approval, the benefit of deduction u/s 35(2AB) of th…

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

PLAZMA TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -10, , PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 929/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: FixedITAT Pune18 Apr 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma

Section 35Section 35(1)

…he assessee cannot claim weighted deduction in respect of R & D expenditure. To strengthen his submissions the ld. DR placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in the case of PCP Chemicals (P.) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer reported as 168 ITD 26 (Mumbai-Trib.). 4 ITA No. 929/PUN/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 5. We have heard the submissions made by the representative of rival sides and have perused the documents available on record. We have also considered the decisions on which respective sides have placed reliance. The solitary issue in present appeal is whether for the impugned assessment year…

PIRAMAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5471/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Jahangir Mistry, Sr. Counsel a/wFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(3)Section 80I

…competent authority in the manner prescribed under the statute is a mandatory condition for availing deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act. In support, he relied upon the decision of the Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, in PCP Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. v/s ITO, [2018] 168 ITD 26 (Mum.). 23 M/s. Piramal Enterprises Ltd. 27. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. It is an undisputed fact that there is no approval by the competent authority in Form no.3CM in respect of the expenditure incurred towards the R&D facility. Section 35(2AB) of the Act mandates furnishing of approval in Form no.3CM…