How many judgments cite Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Pr.CIT?

47 judgments on BharatTax cite Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Pr.CIT (162 ITD 484), spanning 2018 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Pr.CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 35(2AB), Section 14A, Section 35(3), Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148.

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Pr.CIT

162 ITD 484Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2017#2438 most cited

What is Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Pr.CIT authority for?

The approval of an in-house R&D centre through Form 3CM is the primary document for claiming weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) for scientific research expenditure. The case clarifies the significance of this form and the role of the prescribed authority (DSIR) in the approval process.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Pr.CIT · 162 ITD 484 · Section 35(2AB) · weighted deduction · scientific research expenditure · in-house R&D centre approval · Form 3CM · DSIR · Section 35(1)(i)

Sections most often in play

Section 35(2AB)Section 14A Section 35(3)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 250 Section 35(1)(i)

Issues it is cited on

scientific research expenditure section 35(1)(i)section 8d(2)(ii)section 35ab section 35(1)section 35(1)(iv)weighted deduction section 115jaa section 35(2ab)section 115o section 237 section 39

Judgments citing Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Pr.CIT

Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 7(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 7284/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.7284/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd Acit-7(3)(1) T-8B, 5Th Floor, Phoenix House, A-Wing Room No.142 G बनाम/ Phoenix Mill Compound Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 462 Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 013. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcp-2914-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) : अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Urvi A. Mehta-Ld.Ar ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Rajeev Harit -Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तारीख/ : 07/02/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणाक"तारीख/ : 26/05/2020 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश/ O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): - 1.1 Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year [In Short Referred To As ‘Ay’] 2014-15 Contest Certain Additions / Adjustment Made In Final Assessment Order Dated 17/10/2018 Passed By Ld. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-7(3)(1), Mumbai [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13), Pursuant To The Directions Of Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Mumbai

For Appellant: Ms. Urvi A. Mehta-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit -Ld. CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 35Section 92C(1)

…1 M/s. Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd. Assessment Year-2014-15 आयकरअपीलीयअ"धकरण“जे” "यायपीठमुंबईम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI "ीश""जीतदे,"या"यकसद"यएवं "ीमनोजकुमारअ"वाल, लेखासद"यकेसम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.7284/Mum/2018 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) Omni Active Health Technologies Ltd ACIT-7(3)(1) T-8B, 5th Floor, Phoenix House, A-Wing Room No.142 G बनाम/ Phoenix Mill Compound Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 462 Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 013. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. A…

Crompton Greaves Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 5390/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Cit-6(2)(1) M/S. Crompton Greaves Ltd. R. No.504/563-C, 5Th Floor, 6Th Floor, Cg House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 030 Pan/Gir No. Aaacc 2089 A (Revenue) : (Assessee) & M/S. Crompton Greaves Ltd. Asst. Cit-6(2)(1) 6Th Floor, Cg House, R. No.504/563-C, 5Th Floor, Vs. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 030 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaacc 2089 A (Assessee) : (Revenue) : Shri A. M. Mittal Revenue By Assessee By : Shri Pradip Kapasi Date Of Hearing : 23.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2019

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi

Section 14(1)Section 14ASection 35

…in-house R & D facility by the prescribed authority. Undisputedly, there is no mention or approval of the quantum of expenditure. 10. Then, as observed by the Ahmedbad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs. Pr.CIT (2017) 162 ITD 484 as approved by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court vide its decision reported at 250 taxmann 270, it has been held that the objective of Form 3CL is limited to the forwarding of the intimation of the approval of the unit; that Form No. 3CL is a mere report for intimation of approval of R & D facility. In this regard, as rightly pointed out, such aspe…

ACIT 6(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Crompton Greaves Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 5295/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi

Section 14(1)Section 14ASection 35

Copper Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Satara vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, Satara

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 652/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.621/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GajrathiFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gudekar

Section 143(3)Section 35Section 35(1)(iv)

…amounts of expenditure had been inserted in the said form No.3CL. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee further placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Ahmedabad Bench of Tribunal in Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs. Pr.CIT (2017) 162 ITD 484 (Ahmedabad – Trib.), wherein it has been held by the Tribunal that form No.3CL is merely a report in the form of intimation regarding approval of in- house R&D facility to be sent from prescribed authority‟s end to the Department and once the facility is approved in form No.3CM, the expenses incurred within the notified period have to be allowed…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Cooper Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Satara

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 621/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.621/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GajrathiFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gudekar

Section 143(3)Section 35Section 35(1)(iv)

Cummins India Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 309/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.309/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Cummins India Limited, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Kothrud, Pune – 411038 …. Pan: Aaacc7258B Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1(1), Pune

For Appellant: S/Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Ms. Nirupama Kotru

Section 143(3)Section 92C

…amounts of expenditure had been inserted in the said form No.3CL. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee further placed reliance on the ratio laid down by the Ahmedabad Bench of Tribunal in Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs. Pr.CIT (2017) 162 ITD 484 (Ahmedabad – Trib.), wherein it has been held by the Tribunal that form No.3CL is merely a report in the form of intimation regarding approval of in-house R&D facility to be sent from prescribed authority’s end to the Department and once the facility is approved in form No.3CM, the expenses incurred within the notified period have to be allowed u…

Nrb Bearings Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 2(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3770/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

Section 139(1)Section 23Section 40

…ing of Form 3CL is only directory and not mandatory for claiming deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act. In this regard, he placed reliance on the following case laws:- a. DCIT Vs. Famy Care Ltd 952 taxmann.com 461) b. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd Vs. Pr. CIT (162 ITD 484) c. Sri biotech Laboratories India Ltd Vs. ACIT (36 ITR (T) 88) d. Mahindra and Mahindra ltd Vs. Addl CIT (ITA No.586/Mum/2013) The Ld A.R further submitted that Form 3CL is issued by DSIR and the assessee has got no control over the same. Accordingly he submitted that the order passed by Ld CIT(A) should be upheld. 12. We heard the parties on…