Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

39 SOT 17Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2010#4866 most cited

What is Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT authority for?

Expenditure incurred for bringing goodwill to the assessee or for promoting the business is allowable as a deduction.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT · 39 SOT 17 · ITAT 2010 · CSR expenditure · goodwill expenditure · business promotion expenditure · allowable expenditure · section 37(1) · Income Tax Act

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(h)section 17(2)slump saleprohibited by lawcsr expenditureemployees contribution to pfindexed cost of acquisitionsection 31unabsorbed depreciationsection 269section 30stamp duty value

Judgments citing Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

ANUNTA TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT SERVICES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2407/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailanunta Technology Management Services Ltd., Level – 2, Block – 6, Nirlon Knowledge Park, Goregaon East, S.O. Mumbai ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400063 Pan : Aakca6159M V/S Dcit – 4(1)(1), ……………… Respondent Mumbai Assessee By : Shri K.K. Ved Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.K. VedFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 37(1)

…the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Molasses Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 66 (SC) and the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax: [2010] 39 SOT 17 (Delhi) (URO) without appreciating that both the aforesaid decisions were considered by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Biocon Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax – LTU, Bangalore: 2013] 35 taxmann.com 335 (Bangalore - Trib.) (SB)/[2013] 25 ITR(T) 602 (Bangalore - Trib.) (SB) while holding that the deduction under Section 37…

HINDUSTAN COCA-COLA BEVERAGES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee’s for AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17

ITA 6766/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu,CITDR

…e nature and details of the CSR expense incurred by the assessee was submitted before the ld. CIT(A). He further placed reliance on the decision rendered by this Tribunal in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax (2010) 39 SOT 17 (Delhi) (URO) wherein the claim of expenditure incurred in order to bring goodwill to the assessee or for promoting the business was held as allowable. The relevant finding of the decision reads as under:- "31. We have carefully considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us. The contribution of Rs. 50 lacs was made by t…

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI vs. HINDUSTAN COCA-COLA BEVERAGES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee’s for AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17

ITA 6487/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu,CITDR

…e nature and details of the CSR expense incurred by the assessee was submitted before the ld. CIT(A). He further placed reliance on the decision rendered by this Tribunal in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax (2010) 39 SOT 17 (Delhi) (URO) wherein the claim of expenditure incurred in order to bring goodwill to the assessee or for promoting the business was held as allowable. The relevant finding of the decision reads as under:- "31. We have carefully considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us. The contribution of Rs. 50 lacs was made by t…

HINDUSTAN COCA-COLA BEVERAGES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDLCIT, SPECIAL RANGE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee’s for AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17

ITA 6508/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu,CITDR

…e nature and details of the CSR expense incurred by the assessee was submitted before the ld. CIT(A). He further placed reliance on the decision rendered by this Tribunal in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax (2010) 39 SOT 17 (Delhi) (URO) wherein the claim of expenditure incurred in order to bring goodwill to the assessee or for promoting the business was held as allowable. The relevant finding of the decision reads as under:- "31. We have carefully considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us. The contribution of Rs. 50 lacs was made by t…

HINDUSTAN COCA-COLA BEVERAGES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDLCIT, SPECIAL RANGE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee’s for AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17

ITA 6507/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu,CITDR

…e nature and details of the CSR expense incurred by the assessee was submitted before the ld. CIT(A). He further placed reliance on the decision rendered by this Tribunal in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax (2010) 39 SOT 17 (Delhi) (URO) wherein the claim of expenditure incurred in order to bring goodwill to the assessee or for promoting the business was held as allowable. The relevant finding of the decision reads as under:- "31. We have carefully considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us. The contribution of Rs. 50 lacs was made by t…

ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-4, NEW DELHI vs. HINDUSTAN COCA-COLA BEVERAGES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee’s for AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17

ITA 6298/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu,CITDR

…e nature and details of the CSR expense incurred by the assessee was submitted before the ld. CIT(A). He further placed reliance on the decision rendered by this Tribunal in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax (2010) 39 SOT 17 (Delhi) (URO) wherein the claim of expenditure incurred in order to bring goodwill to the assessee or for promoting the business was held as allowable. The relevant finding of the decision reads as under:- "31. We have carefully considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us. The contribution of Rs. 50 lacs was made by t…

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4 , NEW DELHI vs. HINDUSTAN COCA- COLA BEVERAGES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee’s for AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17

ITA 6297/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu,CITDR

…e nature and details of the CSR expense incurred by the assessee was submitted before the ld. CIT(A). He further placed reliance on the decision rendered by this Tribunal in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax (2010) 39 SOT 17 (Delhi) (URO) wherein the claim of expenditure incurred in order to bring goodwill to the assessee or for promoting the business was held as allowable. The relevant finding of the decision reads as under:- "31. We have carefully considered the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us. The contribution of Rs. 50 lacs was made by t…

XSEED EDUCATION PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 166/BANG/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Years : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

…urt in the case of CIT Vs. Biocon reported in 131 Taxmann.com 188 and CIT Vs. Lemon Tree Hotels Pvt. Ltd. reported in 104 Taxmann.com 27. Likewise, the ld. CIT(A) also found that the Delhi Tribunal in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. ACIT reported in 39 SOT 17 (Delhi) has held that the expenses under ESOP are not allowable deduction under the provisions of sec. 37 of the Act. In view of the above, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. . Page 3 of 6 5. Being aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. The ld. AR before us filed a paper book running from pag…

LEARININGMATE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. LD PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, MUMBAI

ITA 1696/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Shri Karthik NatarajanFor Respondent: MS N. V. Nadkarni
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 37(1)

…roceedings. 3. xx xx 4. The detailed submission of the assessee has been duly considered. It is seen that there are judgements on this 4 issue which are in favour of the assessee as well as against the assessee. In the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. [2010] 39 SOT 17 (Delhi) (URO) it was held that what was loss to the assessee was by way of short receipt of share premium account and not by way of any expenditure or incurring any liability for such an expenditure. By issuing shares at below market price, the same did not result into incurring any expenditure, rather it resulted into short receipt of share premiu…

ACIT CIRCLE-6(2), NEW DELHI vs. CVENT INDIA PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 523/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usacit Vs. Cvent India Pvt. Ltd. Circle – 6(2) H-89, Naraina Vihar New Delhi New Delhi – 110 028 Pan No. Aaccc 7670 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Himanshu Sinha, Adv. Shri Bhuwan Dhoopar, Adv. Revenue By Shri Avikal Manu, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 08.11.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under :-

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

…mpany Cvent Inc. USA and not from the appellant company Cvent India P. Ltd., these are notional expenses not allowable as business expenses. He has also relied on the decision of ITAT, Delhi in the case of Ranbaxy laboratories Ltd versus additional CIT (2010) 39 SOT 17. However, the AO has allowed Rs. 30,56,762/- out of Rs. 1,58,93,019/- as actually incurred expenses on account of allotted stocks. 6.4 The appellant has relied on Novo Nordisk India Vs DCIT, ITA 1275/Bang/2011 and DCIT Vs Accenture Services ITA 4540/Mum/2008 to support its claim that stocks of parent ACIT vs. Cvent India Pvt. Ltd. 8 company can be…

AMEE FOSTER WHEELER INDIA PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE RANGE-1,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 680/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 680/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Amec Foster Wheeler India Pvt. The Acit (Osd), Ltd., Vs. Corporate Range -1, Zenith Building, 6Th Floor, Chennai Ascendas It Park, Csir Road, Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. Pan : Aaacf 3204C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. K.Amulya, Ca & Ms. V. Rajeswari, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Marudhu Pandyan, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.12.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Chennai In Ita No.479/16-17/Cit(A)-4/A.Y.2014-15 Dated 06.02.2020. The Assessment Was Framed By The Acit(Osd), Corporate Range-1, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2014-15, U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Vide Order Dated 29.12.2016. 2. The First Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is As Regards To The Order Of Cit(A) Confirming The Action Of Ao In Making Disallowance Of Cost Incurred In Connection With Off The Shelf Software Products Treating The Same As Royalty Under The Provisions Of The Act Read With Relevant Treaties. For This, Assessee Raised Ground Nos. 2 To 4 But The Relevant Ground Is Ground No.2, Which Reads As Under:- “2. The Ld. Cit(A) & Ld. Ao Erred In Non-Consideration Of The Fact That The Said Expenditure Merely Represents Cost To Cost Reimbursement Of Expenditure Incurred On Behalf Of The Appellant By Afwg Overseas Entities & Therefore, No Income Arises In The Hands Of Afwg Entities Necessitating The Obligation To Withhold Taxes On The Part Of The Appellant Under The Provisions Of The Act.”

For Appellant: Ms. K.Amulya, CA &For Respondent: Shri S. Marudhu Pandyan, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

…as incurred expenses by way of payment to its parent company which has in turn issued shares to the employees of the assessee and therefore, as considered by the AO, the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., vs. Addl.CIT, [2010] 39 SOT 17, wherein ESOP expenditure is purely held to be notional. The ld.AR stated that the assessee has incurred expenses towards disbursing compensation to the employees for their services and hence, the same is revenue in nature. For this, she relied on the decision of Chennai Tribunal in the case of Caterpillar India (P) Ltd., vs. DCIT in ITA No.1722/Ch…

IDEA CELLULAR LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2285/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

…. If at all it is to be viewed in terms of expenditure, then, at best, it would be in the nature of a capital expenditure. He supported his view by relying on the order passed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2010] 39 SOT 17 (URO). It was stated that the Tribunal in that case has held that since the receipt of share premium is not taxable, any short receipt of such premium on issuing options to employees will be notional loss and not actual loss for which any liability is incurred. The learned Departmental Representative contended that the Mumbai bench of the Tribunal…

DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2273/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

…. If at all it is to be viewed in terms of expenditure, then, at best, it would be in the nature of a capital expenditure. He supported his view by relying on the order passed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2010] 39 SOT 17 (URO). It was stated that the Tribunal in that case has held that since the receipt of share premium is not taxable, any short receipt of such premium on issuing options to employees will be notional loss and not actual loss for which any liability is incurred. The learned Departmental Representative contended that the Mumbai bench of the Tribunal…

CENTUM LEARNING LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, for the statistical purposes, this appeal is

ITA 5067/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2022AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 14ASection 37(1)

…nses amounting to Rs.4,99,46,617/ - on the ground that the impugned cost is a notional and is a capital expense, that the cost did not relate to the assessment year under consideration. Relied upon the decision of Ranbaxy Laboratories by IT AT Delhi Benches. [39 SOT 17 (Del)] Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 2. The learned CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of Rs.4,99,46,617/- on account of ESOP cost claimed by the company. 2.1 CIT(A) stated that the expenditure/loss was not allowable as deduction because the amount was a notional loss and a capital expenditure and therefore not Page 7 of 14 Centum Learning L…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 12(1), NEW DELHI vs. ICRA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for assessment year 2011-12 and 2012-13 are allowed partly for statistical purposes and Cross Objection of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 5707/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 145

…SOP scheme. It is observed that the appellant has relied on the Tribunal’s decision in Biocon Ltd vs. Dy. CIT (LTU) [2013] 35 taxmann.com 335 (ITAT Bang)(SB). This decision has 'over ruled’ that of ITAT (Del) in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd, vs. Addl. CIT (2010) (39 SOT 17). Also, both the jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Lemon Tree Hotels Ltd. (2015) ITA No.107/2015 and ITAT Delhi in Bharti Airtel Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (2014) (43 taxmann.com 50) have ruled that such compensation is deductible as a revenue expenditure. In fact, the Hon’ble HC has relied on the decision of the C.O. No. 8/Del/2018 Madras HC in PVP Ve…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 12(1), NEW DELHI vs. ICRA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for assessment year 2011-12 and 2012-13 are allowed partly for statistical purposes and Cross Objection of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 5706/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 145

…SOP scheme. It is observed that the appellant has relied on the Tribunal’s decision in Biocon Ltd vs. Dy. CIT (LTU) [2013] 35 taxmann.com 335 (ITAT Bang)(SB). This decision has 'over ruled’ that of ITAT (Del) in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd, vs. Addl. CIT (2010) (39 SOT 17). Also, both the jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Lemon Tree Hotels Ltd. (2015) ITA No.107/2015 and ITAT Delhi in Bharti Airtel Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (2014) (43 taxmann.com 50) have ruled that such compensation is deductible as a revenue expenditure. In fact, the Hon’ble HC has relied on the decision of the C.O. No. 8/Del/2018 Madras HC in PVP Ve…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INDIABULLS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6603/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6602/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs M/S Indiabulls Real Estate Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-12(1), M-62 & 63, First Floor, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci5194F

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Kedia, CIT DR
Section 14A

…given on shares is allowable? *If Yes when and how much? *Subsequent adjustment to discount? 19. The Tribunal examined the issue from the perspective of capital expenditure as laid down by the Delhi bench in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT 39 SOT 17. It was held in VIP Industries Vs DCIT in ITA No. 7242/Mum/2008 that the short receipt of premium on receiving option to the employee will be notional loss but not actual loss for which any liability has incurred. The Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in SSI Ltd. Vs DCIT 85 TTJ 1049 wherein granting of deduction of the discount on shares was treated as…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INDIABULLS REAL ESTATE LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6602/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6602/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs M/S Indiabulls Real Estate Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-12(1), M-62 & 63, First Floor, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci5194F

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Kedia, CIT DR
Section 14A

…given on shares is allowable? *If Yes when and how much? *Subsequent adjustment to discount? 19. The Tribunal examined the issue from the perspective of capital expenditure as laid down by the Delhi bench in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT 39 SOT 17. It was held in VIP Industries Vs DCIT in ITA No. 7242/Mum/2008 that the short receipt of premium on receiving option to the employee will be notional loss but not actual loss for which any liability has incurred. The Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in SSI Ltd. Vs DCIT 85 TTJ 1049 wherein granting of deduction of the discount on shares was treated as…

DCIT CIR. 7(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. PEOPLE INTERACTIVE (I) PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 5132/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. R. C. Sharma, Am & Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5132 & 5133/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 &2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri M. C. OmiFor Respondent: ShriR. S. Samria, AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…. If at all it is to be viewed in terms of expenditure, then, at best, it would be in the nature of a capital expenditure. He supported his view' by relying on the order passed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal inRanbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2010] 39 SOT 17 (URO). It was stated that the Tribunal in that case has held that since the receipt of share premium is not taxable, any short receipt of such premium on issuing options to employees will be notional loss and not actual loss for which any liability is incurred. The learned Departmental Representative contended that the Mumbai bench of the Tribunal…

M/S. RELIGARE FINVEST LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2284/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Acit, Circle-15(1), New Delhi Religare Finvest Ltd., D-3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi Pan : Aafcs6801H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Rohit Garg, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Ca Respondent By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xviii, New Delhi, Dated 28.02.2013, Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 28Section 36Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)

…. If at all it is to be viewed in terms of expenditure, then, at best, it would be in the nature of a capital expenditure. He supported his view by relying on the order passed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2010] 39 SOT 17 (URO). It was stated that the Tribunal in that case has held that since the receipt of share premium is not taxable, any short receipt of such premium on issuing options to employees will be notional loss and not actual loss for which any liability is incurred. The learned Departmental Representative contended that the Mumbai bench of the Tribunal…

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (39 SOT 17) — Cited in 24 Judgments | BharatTax