← All Phrases

“weighted deduction”

Business ExpensesSection 35(2AB)Section 35(2AB)486 judgments

The decision most relied on for weighted deduction is CIT v. Claris Lifesciences Ltd. (326 ITR 251), cited in 196 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on weighted deduction

CIT v. Claris Lifesciences Ltd.
326 ITR 251 · 2010 · High Court
196
citing judgments

If approval from the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) for an in-house R&D centre is granted during the previous year, the assessee is entitled to claim weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) for the entire expenditure incurred during that year.

CIT v. Microlabs Ltd.
383 ITR 490 · 2016 · High Court
175
citing judgments

If an assessee possesses interest-free funds exceeding investments in tax-free securities, it is presumed that investments are made from these own funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii). Additionally, weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) is computed on the gross expenditure incurred, not net expenditure after reducing income earned.

CIT v. Sadan Vikas (India) Ltd.
335 ITR 117 · 2011 · High Court
112
citing judgments

Weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) is allowable for R&D expenditure incurred even if the approval from the DSIR is granted in a subsequent assessment year, provided the application for approval was made in time. The assessee is entitled to the deduction if the approval is based on verification of details submitted.

PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.
397 ITR 681 · 2017 · High Court
84
citing judgments

For claiming weighted deduction under section 35(2AB), the existence of recognition for a Research and Development (R&D) Centre is relevant, not necessarily the date of approval or recognition.

Cummins India Ltd. v. DCIT
96 Taxmann.com 576 · 2018 · ITAT
67
citing judgments

The weighted deduction for scientific research expenditure under Section 35(2AB) is allowable, clarifying that the requirement for the prescribed authority to approve or quantify the expenditure from year to year became effective only from April 1, 2016, through amendments to Rule 6(7A)(b).

CIT v. Cadila Healthcare Ltd.
31 Taxmann.com 300 · 2013 · High Court
65
citing judgments

Section 35(2AB), an incentive provision, allows weighted deduction for expenditure 'on in-house research or development facility' even if related activities like clinical trials are conducted externally, provided they are for the in-house research. This requires a liberal interpretation of the provision.

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Pr.CIT
162 ITD 484 · 2017 · ITAT
47
citing judgments

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.

Tejas Network Ltd. v. DCIT
60 Taxmann.com 309 · 2015 · High Court
41
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot question the correctness of the certificate issued by the prescribed authority for claiming weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) for scientific research expenditure. The deduction is limited to the amount approved and certified by the competent authority.

Judgments citing weighted deduction

Deepak Novochem Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 2561/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Ita Nos. 2558 To 2562/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Deepak Novochem The Acit, Cc-8(1), Technologies Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. Vs. 515, 5Th Floor, Citi Point, Boat 656, 6Th Floor, M.K. Road, Club Road, Pune City, Mumbai-400020. Pune-411 001. Pan No. Aaccd 5796 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. H.P. Mahajani Revenue By : Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. MahajaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 35

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), ("CIT(A)) and the Ld. tax (Appeals), ("CIT(A)) and the Ld. Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Income ... only, as against the Appellant's claim for s. 59,38,000 only, as against the Appellant's claim for weighted deduction with reference to expenditure of Rs. 62,17,380, weighted deduction with reference to expenditure of Rs. 62,17,380, weighted deduction with reference to expenditure

Deepak Novochem Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 2560/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Ita Nos. 2558 To 2562/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Deepak Novochem The Acit, Cc-8(1), Technologies Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. Vs. 515, 5Th Floor, Citi Point, Boat 656, 6Th Floor, M.K. Road, Club Road, Pune City, Mumbai-400020. Pune-411 001. Pan No. Aaccd 5796 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. H.P. Mahajani Revenue By : Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. MahajaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 35

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), ("CIT(A)) and the Ld. tax (Appeals), ("CIT(A)) and the Ld. Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Income ... only, as against the Appellant's claim for s. 59,38,000 only, as against the Appellant's claim for weighted deduction with reference to expenditure of Rs. 62,17,380, weighted deduction with reference to expenditure of Rs. 62,17,380, weighted deduction with reference to expenditure

Deepak Novochem Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 2559/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Ita Nos. 2558 To 2562/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Deepak Novochem The Acit, Cc-8(1), Technologies Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. Vs. 515, 5Th Floor, Citi Point, Boat 656, 6Th Floor, M.K. Road, Club Road, Pune City, Mumbai-400020. Pune-411 001. Pan No. Aaccd 5796 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. H.P. Mahajani Revenue By : Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. MahajaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 35

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), ("CIT(A)) and the Ld. tax (Appeals), ("CIT(A)) and the Ld. Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Income ... only, as against the Appellant's claim for s. 59,38,000 only, as against the Appellant's claim for weighted deduction with reference to expenditure of Rs. 62,17,380, weighted deduction with reference to expenditure of Rs. 62,17,380, weighted deduction with reference to expenditure

Deepak Novochem Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 2558/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Ita Nos. 2558 To 2562/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Deepak Novochem The Acit, Cc-8(1), Technologies Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. Vs. 515, 5Th Floor, Citi Point, Boat 656, 6Th Floor, M.K. Road, Club Road, Pune City, Mumbai-400020. Pune-411 001. Pan No. Aaccd 5796 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. H.P. Mahajani Revenue By : Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023

For Appellant: Mr. H.P. MahajaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 35

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), ("CIT(A)) and the Ld. tax (Appeals), ("CIT(A)) and the Ld. Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under Assessing Officer ('AO') erred in allowing weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Income ... only, as against the Appellant's claim for s. 59,38,000 only, as against the Appellant's claim for weighted deduction with reference to expenditure of Rs. 62,17,380, weighted deduction with reference to expenditure of Rs. 62,17,380, weighted deduction with reference to expenditure

Srf Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

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

ITA 6252/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2015-16] Srf Limited, Vs Acit, The Galleria, Dlf Mayur Vihar, Circle-1, Ltu, Unit No.236 & 237, Second Floor, New Delhi. Mayur Place, Noida Link Road, Mayur Vihar, Phase-I Extn., Delhi-110091. Pan-Aaacs0206P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Ca, Shri R.K.Kapoor, Adv. & Shri Harish Dhamija, Adv. Respondent By Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 26.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20.11.2023 Order

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234CSection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35

circumstances of the appellant's case in upholding the addition/ disallowance/ denying deductions amounting to 35,88,28,243/-on account of disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB), disallowance of depreciation on Goodwill and claim of balance additional depreciation. Further Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding addition/not allowing ... additions/disallowances made by Ld. AO and subsequently upheld by Ld. CIT(A) are wholly illegal, untenable and erroneous. 3. Disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case in upholding

ACIT, Circle-8(2), New Delhi vs. Ecocat India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8521/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Raghvan, Adv.; &
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 35Section 37(1)Section 6Section 68

under section 35(2AB) of the Act on the ground that the prescribed authority has not issued approval for qualifying for weighted deduction in Form No. 3CL until the date of completion of assessment as required under sub section 6(d) of section 35(2AB) of I.T.A. No. 8521/Del/2019 ... Appeals) based on the certificate issued by DSIR in Form No. 3CL allowed the claim for weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act to the extent of Rs.6,14,64,000/-. The ld. CIT (Appeals) also allowed expenditure of Rs.1,35,24,607/- as allowable Revenue expenditure under

C-Det Explosive Industries Pvt. Ltd, Nagpur vs. D.C.I.T, Circle-2, Nagpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue (ITA/42/2020) is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue

ITA 312/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Subrahmanyan
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)

hands of the payee organizations would not affect rights and interests of assessee for claim of weighted deduction. Further, he drew our attention to page 30 of the paper book and argued that the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta confirmed the view taken by the ITAT, Kolkata Bench ... hands of the payee organizations would not affect the rights and interests of the assessee herein for claim of weighted deduction u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act. 8.4. We also find that the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in exactly similar facts had decided the issue in favour

C-Det Explosive Industries Pvt. Ltd, Nagpur vs. D.C.I.T, Circle-2, Nagpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue (ITA/42/2020) is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue

ITA 311/NAG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Subrahmanyan
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)

hands of the payee organizations would not affect rights and interests of assessee for claim of weighted deduction. Further, he drew our attention to page 30 of the paper book and argued that the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta confirmed the view taken by the ITAT, Kolkata Bench ... hands of the payee organizations would not affect the rights and interests of the assessee herein for claim of weighted deduction u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act. 8.4. We also find that the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in exactly similar facts had decided the issue in favour

C-Det Explosive Industries Pvt.Ltd., Nagpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Nagpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue (ITA/42/2020) is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue

ITA 310/NAG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V. LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Subrahmanyan
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)

hands of the payee organizations would not affect rights and interests of assessee for claim of weighted deduction. Further, he drew our attention to page 30 of the paper book and argued that the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta confirmed the view taken by the ITAT, Kolkata Bench ... hands of the payee organizations would not affect the rights and interests of the assessee herein for claim of weighted deduction u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act. 8.4. We also find that the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in exactly similar facts had decided the issue in favour

Sandhar Technologies Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle Ltu-1, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8160/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT (Judicial Member), SHRI M.BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 35

plea of the assessee that once the R&D facility is approved by DSIR, the expenditure incurred thereon would be allowable as weighted deduction to the assessee u/s 35(2AB) of the Act. The total expenditure incurred on R&D facility by the assessee is as under:- Towards capital expenditure ... restricted the deduction to Rs 1,53,80,000/- on the ground that DSIR had approved weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act to the extent of Rs 96.08 lacs on account of revenue expenditure and Rs 57.72 lacs (Rs 28.86 lacs *2) on account of capital expenditure. Accordingly

DCIT- 3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2588/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 32Section 35

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) : 3 Reliance Industries Ltd. AY 2017-18 & 2018-19 Disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) on the basis of Form 3CL 1. Erred in confirming the disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act, amounting ... without prejudice to one another. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) : Disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) on the basis of Form 3CL 1. Erred in confirming the disallowance of weighted deduction

DCIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2587/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 32Section 35

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) : 3 Reliance Industries Ltd. AY 2017-18 & 2018-19 Disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) on the basis of Form 3CL 1. Erred in confirming the disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act, amounting ... without prejudice to one another. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) : Disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) on the basis of Form 3CL 1. Erred in confirming the disallowance of weighted deduction

Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2318/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 32Section 35

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) : 3 Reliance Industries Ltd. AY 2017-18 & 2018-19 Disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) on the basis of Form 3CL 1. Erred in confirming the disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act, amounting ... without prejudice to one another. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) : Disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) on the basis of Form 3CL 1. Erred in confirming the disallowance of weighted deduction

Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and both the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2317/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 32Section 35

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) : 3 Reliance Industries Ltd. AY 2017-18 & 2018-19 Disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) on the basis of Form 3CL 1. Erred in confirming the disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act, amounting ... without prejudice to one another. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) : Disallowance of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) on the basis of Form 3CL 1. Erred in confirming the disallowance of weighted deduction

M/S. Havells India Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1258/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rajat Jain, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 35(1)(i)Section 40Section 80Section 801CSection 92BSection 92C

foreign travelling expenses incurred on Research and Development activities; whereas once facility is approved by DSIR, the entire expenditure so incurred is eligible for weighted deduction. 8. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and the legal position, the learned CIT (A) has erred in confirming

Strides Pharma Science Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT -5(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result ITA number 1004/M/2021 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2016 – 17 is allowed

ITA 1004/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Strides Pharma Science Ltd. Dcit 15(1)(2) 201, Devavrata, Sector-17, Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Vs. Vashi, Navi Mumbai, 400703 Mumbai 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcs8104P

For Respondent: Ms Samruddhi Hande SR DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

audited profit and loss account except to the extent provided in the explanation to section 115JB of the Act 7. Disallowance of weighted deduction amounting to INR 17,54,78,992 claimed under Section 35(2AB) of the Act (Page 25 & 26 of the Assessment Order ... learned AO erred in facts and in law in making disallowance of weighted deduction claimed under Section 35(2AB) of the Act, and in doing so have grossly erred: 7.1 In failing to appreciate: 7.1.1 that Section 35(2AB)(1) prescribes the requirement of approval of the facility

Nitin Raj Marwah, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 10(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2252/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja PitaleFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 35(1)(iii)

account of donations given to the trusts/institutions. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee filed revised computation of total income withdrawing the weighted deduction claimed under section 35(1)(iii) of the Act aggregating to Rs.43,75,000, on account of donations given to trusts/institutions. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) vide

Eternis Fine Chemicals Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Mumbai

ITA 2079/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Ms. Padmavathy. Sassessment Year: 2013-14 V. M/S.Eternis Fine Chemicals Ltd., The Cit(Appeals), B 1004, Peninsula Tower, Nfac, Peninsula Corporate Park, Mumbai. G.K.Marg, Lower Parel West, Mumbai-400 013. [Pan: Aaach 3757 J] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh Jain, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P.D.Chougule, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 195Section 32Section 35Section 40

ought to be deleted. 3. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO of not allowing the weighted deduction of Rs.33,75,754/- (Addition of Rs. 3,20,69,123/- rectified by AO u/s 154 subsequently) u/s.35(2AB) of the Act. On the facts ... circumstances of the case and in law, the weighted deduction of Rs.33,75,754/- claimed under section 35(2AB) of the Act ought to be allowed. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO by making disallowance of Rs.2

Marksans Pharma Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1717/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 35

well as section 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. In its return of income, the assessee claimed weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act of Rs 40,27,49,180 being 200% of revenue expenditure incurred on scientific research amounting ... expenditure as approved by the DSIR in the certificate given by them in Form No. 3CL is to be granted weighted deduction. Thus, it is not for either the assessee or the assessing authority to decide on the expenditure which will be entitled to weighted deduction section

Au Small Finance Bank Limited, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-1

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 203/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT
Section 115JSection 263Section 35ASection 36(1)(viia)

assessee to claim the provisions disallowed in the earlier years. Also, any deduction claimed has to be passed through P&L account, and except weighted deduction, no deduction is allowable more than what has been entered in the books of account. The assessee in its books has created a provision