← All Phrases

“freebies to doctors”

Business ExpensesSection 37 ExplanationSection 37 Explanation50 judgments

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

ITA 3991/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 35Section 41(1)Section 801C

under the Medical Council Act, 1956. Based on the above, ld. Assessing Officer called for the details of expenses incurred on account of freebies to doctors and medical professionals and why the same should not be disallowed. Assessee made a detailed submission along with a list of corporate gifts distributed

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

ITA 3971/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 35Section 41(1)Section 801C

under the Medical Council Act, 1956. Based on the above, ld. Assessing Officer called for the details of expenses incurred on account of freebies to doctors and medical professionals and why the same should not be disallowed. Assessee made a detailed submission along with a list of corporate gifts distributed

WOCKHARDT LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE

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

ITA 837/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Manthan ShahFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 127Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153C

under : “Thus, in guise of the use of funds for Medical Education the funds were used for providing freebies to doctors like travel, stay etc. It is clear that the grant was not utilized for the purposes of Medical Education of doctors as claimed. This shows that the grants ... organize any Medical Conferences and the funds were expended on instruction of the assessee company received through its employees on providing freebies to doctors. The Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations. 2002 (the regulations) further amended on 10/12/2009, prohibits the medical practitioners and their professional associations from

WOCKHARDT LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), PUNE

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

ITA 836/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Manthan ShahFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 127Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153C

under : “Thus, in guise of the use of funds for Medical Education the funds were used for providing freebies to doctors like travel, stay etc. It is clear that the grant was not utilized for the purposes of Medical Education of doctors as claimed. This shows that the grants ... organize any Medical Conferences and the funds were expended on instruction of the assessee company received through its employees on providing freebies to doctors. The Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations. 2002 (the regulations) further amended on 10/12/2009, prohibits the medical practitioners and their professional associations from

WOCKHARDT LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), PUNE

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

ITA 835/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 127Section 132Section 153C

under :\n“Thus, in guise of the use of funds for Medical Education the funds\nwere used for providing freebies to doctors like travel, stay etc. It is clear that\nthe grant was not utilized for the purposes of Medical Education of doctors\nas claimed. This shows that the grants ... organize any Medical Conferences\nand the funds were expended on instruction of the assessee company\nreceived through its employees on providing freebies to doctors. The Indian\nMedical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations,\n2002 (the regulations) further amended on 10/12/2009, prohibits the\nmedical practitioners and their professional associations from

DIOSMA LIFESCIENCES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(1) THANE, THANE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4271/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Prabhash Shankardiosma Lifesciences Private V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Limited बनाम 4(1), Qureshi Mansion, Shop No. 77, C-Wing, Gokhale Road, Naupada, Harmony Mall Commercial Thane West, Thane - 400 Premises, Bhagat Singh Nagar 602, Maharashtra No.1, Link Road, Goregaon(West), Mumbai - 400 104, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcd0525R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Aadesh Rai, Addl. CIT, (Virtually appeared)
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

travelling, local conveyance, accommodation, and food incurred by the Appellant's marketing staff/employees for meeting medical professionals to promote its products and not “freebies” to doctors. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing ... 732/Del/2019 dt 29.04.2019). 5. The AO observed that as per CBDT vide Circular No. 5/ 2012 dated 01.08.2012 expenses incurred on freebies to doctors are inadmissible under section 37(1) of the Act. Circular No. 5/2012 dt 01.08.2012 is reproduced below: P a g e | 8 A.Y. 2018-19 Diosma

ASKLEPIOS REMEDIES PVT. LTD,PATNA vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purpose

ITA 202/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 37

UCPMP, Explanation 1 to section 37\nand the Circular of the CBDT whereas the fact remains that major part of\nexpense are not freebies to Doctors.\n9. For that the sustenance of disallowance by CIT(A) is wrong, illegal and\nunjustified on the facts and circumstances of the appellant

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is also allowed for A

ITA 1038/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 263

income. Placing reliance on judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which highlighted the public harm caused by pharmaceutical companies offering prohibited freebies to Doctors, the Principal Commissioner held that such expenditures are not allowable under section 37(1) of the Act since they are prohibited

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is also allowed for A

ITA 1037/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 263

income. Placing reliance on judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which highlighted the public harm caused by pharmaceutical companies offering prohibited freebies to Doctors, the Principal Commissioner held that such expenditures are not allowable under section 37(1) of the Act since they are prohibited

ARYA SMAJ MODEL TOWN,DELHI vs. PCIT, CENTRAL -3, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4805/DEL/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025
For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 12(1)Section 127Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

nRegistration u/s 12AB cancelled with retrospective\neffect Assessment of trust PCIT (central) jurisdiction to cancel the\nregistration assessee trust as provided freebies to doctors which are in\nviolation of the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct & Ethics)\nRegulations, 2002 - HELD THAT:- We notice that as per serial no.12 of the\nCBDT

AGRA OBSTETRICAL AND GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,AGRA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PUNE

ITA 549/PUN/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2025AY 2022-23
Section 12A

issue alleged by learned PCIT-CC\nis that, Appellant has committed violation of norms / standards of Indian\nMedical Council on account of extending freebies to doctors / professional\nreceived from various Pharma Companies through their sponsorships.\nAppellant refutes the said allegation on various accounts, for which,\nseparate grounds of appeal ... case of Apex Laboratories[2022] 442 ITR 1\n(SC), Hon'ble Supreme court has observed that, activities of Apex (of\nextending freebies to DOCTORS) is covered by Limb-2 i.e. “prohibited by\nlaw\".\nU/s 12AB(4)(f), it is stipulated that, Appellant has to comply with other\nlaws

THE MUMBAI OBSTETRIC GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,LOW PAREL (W) vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 522/PUN/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2025
Section 12A

issue alleged by learned PCIT-CC\nis that, Appellant has committed violation of norms / standards of Indian\nMedical Council on account of extending freebies to doctors / professional\nreceived from various Pharma Companies through their sponsorships.\nAppellant refutes the said allegation on various accounts, for which,\nseparate grounds of appeal ... PCIT). The PCIT's actions were based on allegations that the assessee trusts were acting as conduits for pharmaceutical companies to provide freebies to doctors, which was seen as a violation of the Indian Medical Council Regulations and therefore a 'specified violation' under the Act. The assessee trusts argued that

POONA OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 518/PUN/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2025
Section 12A

issue alleged by learned PCIT-CC\nis that, Appellant has committed violation of norms / standards of Indian\nMedical Council on account of extending freebies to doctors / professional\nreceived from various Pharma Companies through their sponsorships.\nAppellant refutes the said allegation on various accounts, for which,\nseparate grounds of appeal

AIDS SOCIETY OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE

ITA 417/PUN/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2025
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 12A

assessee is found to be carrying out activity of organizing conferences which involves providing facility to pharmaceutical company to give freebies to doctors. This act of facilitating the act of providing freebies is not being carried out in accordance with any of the conditions subject to which it was registered ... issue alleged by learned PCIT-CC is that, Appellant has committed violation of norms / standards of Indian Medical Council on account of extending freebies to doctors / professional received from various Pharma Companies through their sponsorships. Appellant refutes the said allegation on various accounts, for which, separate grounds of appeal

RAMDULARI BANSAL WELFARE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee society is dismissed

ITA 790/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Nov 2024

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Arvind Kumar, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(3)Section 80G

freebies is usually factored into the drug, driving prices up, thus, creating a perpetual publicly injurious cycle. [Para 28] Thus, pharmaceutical companies gifting freebies to doctors, etc. is clearly "prohibited by law", and not allowed to be claimed as a deduction under section 37(1). Doing so would wholly undermine ... Regulations, applicable to all medical practitioners (including doctors in private practice), was introduced w.e.f. 14-12-2009. Thus, pharmaceutical companies' gifting freebies to doctors, etc. is clearly "prohibited by law", and not allowed to be claimed as a deduction under section 37(1) of the Act. Doing so would wholly

RAMDULARI BANSAL WELFARE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee society is dismissed

ITA 789/JPR/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Nov 2024

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Arvind Kumar, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(3)Section 80G

freebies is usually factored into the drug, driving prices up, thus, creating a perpetual publicly injurious cycle. [Para 28] Thus, pharmaceutical companies gifting freebies to doctors, etc. is clearly "prohibited by law", and not allowed to be claimed as a deduction under section 37(1). Doing so would wholly undermine ... Regulations, applicable to all medical practitioners (including doctors in private practice), was introduced w.e.f. 14-12-2009. Thus, pharmaceutical companies' gifting freebies to doctors, etc. is clearly "prohibited by law", and not allowed to be claimed as a deduction under section 37(1) of the Act. Doing so would wholly

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CEN CIRCLE 7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HEGDE AND HEDGE PHARMACEUTICA LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 2441/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2016-17
Section 131Section 133ASection 37(1)

books and periodicals provided to the\nMedical representatives and various students and not to Doctors. As\nsuch, the expenditure cannot be treated as freebies to doctors and\nincurred in contravention of the MCI Guidelines. Consequently, the\nexpenditure cannot be disallowed u/s 37(1) of the Act. The appellant has\nidentified ... n1872 (as also noted by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Kap Scan\n(supra))\".\nPara 33,\n\"Thus, pharmaceutical companies gifting freebies to doctors, etc. is clearly\n\"prohibited by law\", and not allowed to be claimed as a deduction under\nSection 37(1). Doing so would wholly

ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CEN CIR 7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HEGDE AND HEGDE PHARMACEUTICA LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 2438/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash Bairagra, a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 37(1)

books and periodicals provided to the Medical representatives and various students and not to Doctors. As such, the expenditure cannot be treated as freebies to doctors and incurred in contravention of the MCI Guidelines. Consequently, the expenditure cannot be disallowed u/s 37(1) of the Act. The appellant has identified ... doctors. Further, the appellant has also treated all such expenses incurred on behalf of the doctors, except for the conference registration charges, as freebies to doctors and covered by the MCI Guidelines and the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Apex Laboratories. I am not inclined

ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CEN CIR 7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HEGDE AND HEGDE PHARMACEUTICA LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 2437/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2018-19
Section 131Section 133ASection 37(1)

books and periodicals provided to the\nMedical representatives and various students and not to Doctors. As\nsuch, the expenditure cannot be treated as freebies to doctors and\nincurred in contravention of the MCI Guidelines. Consequently, the\nexpenditure cannot be disallowed u/s 37(1) of the Act. The appellant has\nidentified ... n1872 (as also noted by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Kap Scan\n(supra))\".\nPara 33,\n\"Thus, pharmaceutical companies gifting freebies to doctors, etc. is clearly\n\"prohibited by law\", and not allowed to be claimed as a deduction under\nSection 37(1). Doing so would wholly

ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CEN CIR 7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HEGDE AND HEGDE PHARMACEUTICA LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 2436/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2019-20
Section 131Section 133ASection 37(1)

books and periodicals provided to the Medical representatives and various students and not to Doctors. As such, the expenditure cannot be treated as freebies to doctors and incurred in contravention of the MCI Guidelines. Consequently, the expenditure cannot be disallowed u/s 37(1) of the Act. The appellant has identified ... doctors. Further, the appellant has also treated all such expenses incurred on behalf of the doctors, except for the conference registration charges, as freebies to doctors and covered by the MCI Guidelines and the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Apex Laboratories. I am not inclined

Showing 1–20 of 50 · Page 1 of 3