Union of India v. Exide Industries

425 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2020#695 most cited

What is Union of India v. Exide Industries authority for?

The provision for leave encashment is allowable as a deduction only on an actual payment basis under Section 43B(f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 43B(f).

146

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Union of India v. Exide Industries · Exide Industries SC · 425 ITR 1 · Section 43B(f) · Section 43B · leave encashment deduction · payment basis · approved gratuity fund · validity of Section 43B(f) · employee benefit expenses · actual payment · deduction allowability

Sections most often in play

Section 43BSection 14ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 12AA

Issues it is cited on

recognised provident fundsection 43b(f)approved gratuity fundsection 50bsection 40a(9)approved superannuation fundsection 211section 250ofsection 11 exemptionsection 80j(6a)section 43(b)wholly and exclusively for business

Judgments citing Union of India v. Exide Industries

Asst CIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3882/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…e decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI reported in (2007) 292 ITR 470. The revenue challenged the said decision before Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the constitutional validity of Section 43B(f) was upheld in [2020] 425 ITR 1. 13.3. In any event, it is noted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the deduction in respect of such liability is allowable only on actual payment basis. Accordingly, the provision shall be allowed on payment basis in terms of section 43B, i.e., where the payment is made on or before the due date of filing the return of income. We, theref…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3680/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…e decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI reported in (2007) 292 ITR 470. The revenue challenged the said decision before Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the constitutional validity of Section 43B(f) was upheld in [2020] 425 ITR 1. 13.3. In any event, it is noted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the deduction in respect of such liability is allowable only on actual payment basis. Accordingly, the provision shall be allowed on payment basis in terms of section 43B, i.e., where the payment is made on or before the due date of filing the return of income. We, theref…

Aditya Birla Sun Life Amc Limited, Maharashtra vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- Circle 6(1)(1), Maharashtra

ITA 6703/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 6663/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) 2. Ita No. 6701/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) 3. Ita No. 6702/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. Ita No. 6703/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Aditya Birla Sun Life Dcitcircle-6(1)(1), Amc Limited, Room No. 502, 5Th 17Th Floor, One World Vs. Floor, Aayakar Centre Tower-1, Jupiter Bhavan, M. K. Mill Compount, 841, Road, Churchgate, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Delisle Road, S.O. Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb6134D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Doshi, Shri Shrey Agrawal & Shri Aadish Jain, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. ITA No. 6663/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) 2. ITA No. 6701/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) 3. ITA No. 6702/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. ITA No. 6703/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Aditya Birla Sun Life DCITCircle-6(1)(1), AMC Limited, Room No. 502, 5th 17th floor, One World Vs. floor, Aayakar Centre Tower-1, Jupiter Bhavan, M. K. Mill Compount, 841, Road, Churchgate, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Delisle Road, S.O. Mumbai-400 013 P…

The India Cements Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1) Chennai, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2174/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
Section 10(39)Section 115JSection 14A

…ITA No.2174/Chny/2024 (AY 2017-18) M/s. The India Cements Ltd. :: 2 :: 2. Ground No. 1 of the appeal is general in nature which doesn't require any adjudication and is therefore dismissed. 3. Ground No.2 raised by the assessee relates to the disallowance of ₹1,07,44,451/- made by the AO u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act 1961 (herein after the Act) in terms of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules 1962 (herein after the Rules). Briefly stated, the AO had observed from the balance-sheet that the assessee held substantial investments which were capable of yielding tax-free income and therefore, according to him, the expenditu…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. The Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust, Raigad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 545/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…e insertion of section 43B(f) clearly shows that the period of services of employees is irrelevant since the expenses is allowable only on payment basis. 129. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd, reported in 425 ITR 1(2020), he submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the validity of section 43B(f). therefore, the above deduction is allowable u/s 43B(f) of the Act. ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 130. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the above expenditure is allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act in the light of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. The Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust, Raigad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 544/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…e insertion of section 43B(f) clearly shows that the period of services of employees is irrelevant since the expenses is allowable only on payment basis. 129. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd, reported in 425 ITR 1(2020), he submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the validity of section 43B(f). therefore, the above deduction is allowable u/s 43B(f) of the Act. ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 130. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the above expenditure is allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act in the light of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. The Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust, Raigad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 543/PUN/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…e insertion of section 43B(f) clearly shows that the period of services of employees is irrelevant since the expenses is allowable only on payment basis. 129. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd, reported in 425 ITR 1(2020), he submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the validity of section 43B(f). therefore, the above deduction is allowable u/s 43B(f) of the Act. ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 130. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the above expenditure is allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act in the light of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in…

Jawahar Lal Nehru Port Trust, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT Panvel, Panvel

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1155/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…e insertion of section 43B(f) clearly shows that the period of services of employees is irrelevant since the expenses is allowable only on payment basis. 129. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd, reported in 425 ITR 1(2020), he submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the validity of section 43B(f). therefore, the above deduction is allowable u/s 43B(f) of the Act. ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 130. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the above expenditure is allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act in the light of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in…

Jawahar Lal Nehru Port Trust, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT Panvel, Panvel

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1154/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…e insertion of section 43B(f) clearly shows that the period of services of employees is irrelevant since the expenses is allowable only on payment basis. 129. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd, reported in 425 ITR 1(2020), he submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the validity of section 43B(f). therefore, the above deduction is allowable u/s 43B(f) of the Act. ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 130. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the above expenditure is allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act in the light of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in…

Jawahar Lal Nehru Port Trust, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT Panvel, Panvel

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1153/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…e insertion of section 43B(f) clearly shows that the period of services of employees is irrelevant since the expenses is allowable only on payment basis. 129. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd, reported in 425 ITR 1(2020), he submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the validity of section 43B(f). therefore, the above deduction is allowable u/s 43B(f) of the Act. ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 130. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the above expenditure is allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act in the light of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in…

Narayana Hrudayalaya Limited, Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Circle-2(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 246/BANG/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Monish Sowkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Thamba Mahendra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2012-13 Narayana Hrudayalaya Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner No.258/A, Bommasandra of Income Tax, Industrial Area, Circle 2[3][1], Bengaluru – 560 009. Bengaluru. PAN: AABCN 1685J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Monish Sowkar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Thamba Mahendra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Vice President 1. This appeal…

ACIT, Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bata India Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed and the CO is dismissed

ITA 1844/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata in ITA No. 1844/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2009-10;

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH”, KOLKATA SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1844/KOL/2017 (Assessment Year 2009-10) ACIT, Circle 2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Sqr., 7th Floor, Kolkata – 69 ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. M/s Bata India Ltd., 64, S N Banerjee Road, Kolkata - 700013 [PAN: AABCB1043Q] …………………………… Respondent CO No. 124/KOL/2017 (Assessment Year 2009-10) M/s Bata India Ltd., C/o M/s Salarpuria Jajodia & & Co. 7, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata - 700072 [PAN: AABCB1043Q] ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. ACIT, Circle…

Universal Cables Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-6(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 53/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 119(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43B

…grounds submitted during the appellate proceedings are as The Appellant is making this legal claim pursuant to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court arising out of the decision in the case of Union of India vs M/s Exide Industries Ltd. reported in [2020] 425 ITR 1 (SC) wherein it has been held that the provision for leave encashment is allowable on payment basis only u/s 43B(f) of the IT Act, 1961. The Appellant by this additional ground is claiming relief u/s 43B(f) of Rs. 44,51,267/-being the payment of leave encashment as the same was claimed but offered for tax in the year of provision during AY 2002-03…

Vasai Vikas Sahakari Bank Limited, Vasai, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer Circle-3, Thane, Qureshi Mansion, Gokhale Road

In the result, appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed

ITA 1741/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vasai Vikas Sahakari Bank Limited Income Tax Officer Circle-3 Opp New English School, Vasai, Qureshi Mansion, Gokhale Mumbai-401201 Vs. Road, Mumbai- 400602 Pan No. Aaaav 0519 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Prateek JainFor Respondent: Smt. Kavita P. Kaushik, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43Section 43B

…6 The ld counsel submitted that the assessee made claim following the decision of Hon‟ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries Limited V/s. Union Of India (Supra) , which has been reversed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court 24.04.2020 as reported in 425 ITR 1. Therefore, the assessee had made claim under the bonafide understanding based on the decision of the Hon‟ble Calcutta High court (supra), which was prevalent during the relevant period of the date of filing of return of income by the assessee. The Ld. Counsel referred to the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Petr…

Prashant Packaging Pvt.Ltd, Patna vs. DCIT/ACIT, Cir-2, Patna

ITA 644/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey] Ι.Τ.Α. No. 644/Pat/2024

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 43B

…f Girdharilal Goenka vs. CIT 179 ITR 122 (Cal) ii) CIT vs. CPL Tannery in 318 ITR page 179 iii) Gurdas Garg vs. CIT(A) & Ors. [2016] 6 ITR OL 101 (P & H) iv) Honey Enterprises vs. CIT [2016] 381 ITR 258 (Del) v) Union of India vs. Exide Industries Ltd. [2020] 425 ITR 1 vi) Decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT in [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC) The Ld. Counsel draws the attention to the Tribunal over the judgment of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra) regarding the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 and submitted that provision of section 43B have overriding effect over any other…

M/S.State Bank of India(Successor to State Bank of Travancore), Trivandrum vs. The ACIT, Trivandrum

ITA 252/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Sri Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 36(1)(vili)Section 43B

…tself i.e., 43B(f) and therefore, both the learned lower authorities’ action making the impugned disallowance is not sustainable. 10. Learned DR on the other hand submits that hon’ble apex court’s decision in Union of India vs. Excide Industries Ltd., [2020] 425 ITR 1 (SC) has reversed the foregoing judicial precedent. 11. That being the case, we reject the assessee’s instant second substantive ground. Ordered accordingly. 12. This assessee’s latter appeal ITA.No.252/Coch./2017 is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. 13. To sum-up, this assessee’s former appeal ITA.No.251/ Coch./2017 is all…

M/S.State Bank of India(Successor to State Bank of Travancore), Trivandrum vs. The ACIT, Trivandrum

ITA 251/COCH/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Sri Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 36(1)(vili)Section 43B

…tself i.e., 43B(f) and therefore, both the learned lower authorities’ action making the impugned disallowance is not sustainable. 10. Learned DR on the other hand submits that hon’ble apex court’s decision in Union of India vs. Excide Industries Ltd., [2020] 425 ITR 1 (SC) has reversed the foregoing judicial precedent. 11. That being the case, we reject the assessee’s instant second substantive ground. Ordered accordingly. 12. This assessee’s latter appeal ITA.No.252/Coch./2017 is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. 13. To sum-up, this assessee’s former appeal ITA.No.251/ Coch./2017 is all…

DCIT, Circle - 11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Graphite India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, considering the discussions made above, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 473/KOL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 62Section 801ASection 80I

…paid Rs. 30,50,629/- before the due date of filing of the return. It was pointed out by the ld. D/R that this matter was squarely covered against the assessee in light of the decision in the case of Union of India vs. Exide Industries Ltd. reported in [2020] 425 ITR 1 (SC). To settle this issue conclusively, the head notes from the Exide Industries Ltd. (supra) may be extracted as under: “Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business disallowance - Certain deduction to be allowed only on actual payment (Clause (f)) - Leave Encashment Scheme envisages payment of certain amount to employees in lieu of their u…

Keventer Agro Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 4(1), Kolkata

ITA 396/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 43B

…this Section is still in force as no adverse decision is rendered on the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. (supra). Rather the constitutional validity is affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in [2020] 425 ITR 1 (SC). Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO in disallowing the entire provision of Rs. 86,20,351/- following the reasoning given in the order of ld. AO. 3.1. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee also taken us through the judgments in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. (supra) and demonstrated that the said case law applies to cases where…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara vs. M/S. Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited, Vadodara

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 118/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarsn

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MRS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER SN ITA No. AY Appellant Respondent Sun Pharmaceutical Deputy Commissioner of 2006-07 Industries Limited, ITA Nos. 109 to 112 Income-tax, 1-4 to SPARC, Tandalja, /Ahd/2020 Circle-2(1)(1)), 2009-10 Vadodara-400012 Vadodara PAN : AADCS 3124 K Sun Pharmaceutical Deputy Commissioner o…