Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

39 SOT 17Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2010#4858 most cited

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

Expenditure incurred to promote business or bring goodwill to the assessee is allowable as a deduction. However, notional losses arising from issuing shares below market price are not deductible.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Addl. CIT · 39 SOT 17 · section 37(1) · ESOP expenses · CSR expenditure · notional loss · share premium · goodwill expenditure

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

M/S. Religare Commodities Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the disallowance made by the Ld

ITA 2283/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishireligare Commodities Ltd, Acit, D3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, Circle-15(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacf8356R (Appellant) (Respondent) Religare Commodities Ltd, Dcit, D3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, Circle-15(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacf8356R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR
Section 28Section 36(1)(ii)Section 37(1)

…. 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…

Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai vs. People Interactive (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6990/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. R. S.SamariaFor Respondent: Shri B S Bisht
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 37

…. 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…

Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai vs. People Ineractive (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6986/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. R. S.SamariaFor Respondent: Shri B S Bisht
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 37

…. 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…

People Interactive (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai

ITA 4979/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. R. S.SamariaFor Respondent: Shri B S Bisht
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 37

…. 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…