TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 1348
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd issues involved in A.Y. 2009-10 in ITA No. 6747/M/2012. 3. The first grievance relates to the non allowance of weighted deduction @ 150% u/s. 35(2AB) on expenses of Rs. 10,77,95,285/- incurred on clinical trial. 3.1. An identical issue was also there in assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08 wherein similar additions have been made. The matter travelled upto the Tribunal and the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 4517 & 5582 for A.Y. 2007-08 and has decided this issue against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the findings of the AO following the order of the Tribunal. 3.2. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that now this issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....could be put in the market, the regulatory authorities would insist on strict tests and research on all possible aspects, such as possible reactions, effect of the drug and so on. Extensive clinical trials, therefore, would be an intrinsic part of development of any such new pharmaceutical drug. It cannot be imagined that such clinical trial can be carried out only in the laboratory of the pharmaceutical company. If we give such restricted meaning to the term expenditure incurred on in-house research and development facility, we would on one hand be completely diluting the deduction envisaged under sub-section (2AB) of section 35 and on the other, making the explanation noted above quite meaningless. We have noticed that for the purpose of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....archy. The Tribunal further observed that this simple view is subject to some exceptions. It can work efficiently when there is only one judgement of a High Court on the issue and no contrary view has been expressed by any other High Court." 3.4. Before us, the decision of the Tribunal in assessee's own case is against the assessee but as pointed out elsewhere the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court was pronounced later on and therefore the Tribunal did not have the benefit of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. Now that we have the benefit of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court as mentioned hereinabove, we are following the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court and accordingly we set aside the findings o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t not considered by DSIR. 5.1. Facts in issue show that the quantum of R&D expenses eligible for weighted deduction u/s. 35(2AB) of the Act as claimed in the return of income is duly certified by the auditor in the Tax Audit report. The additional claim of Rs. 21,87,858/- is attributable towards Revenue expenditure incurred in connection with the approved R&D unit pertain to expenses incurred towards setting up of affluent treatment plant at Govandi R&D facility. A detailed explanation was filed before the AO explaining the reason for difference between Annual report and return of income and a detailed break-up of the said expenses was submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). It is the claim of the assessee that during the finalization of account,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce and in essence, what is received by the assessee from the purchaser is a component of interest towards delayed payment of the price of the goods sold, supplied and delivered by the assessee, There can be no dispute about the position that the price realized by the assessee from the sale of goods manufactured by the industrial undertaking constitutes a component of the profits and gains derived from the eligible business. The purchaser, on account of the delay in payment of the sale price also pays to the assessee interest. This forms a component of the sale price and is paid towards the lag which has occurred in the payment of the price of the goods sold by the assessee. On these facts, therefore, the payment of interest on account of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....229 ITR 383. Drawing support from these decisions, the additional grounds are admitted. The matter is restored to the file of the AO. The AO is directed to verify the claim of the assessee and allow the same after verification in the light of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs Wockhardt Ltd. in ITA No. 71/M/07. The additional grounds are treated as allowed for statistical purpose. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. ITA No. 4248/M/2013-A.Y. 2008-09 11. The appeal is barred by 481 days. The assessee has filed letter making a request for the condonation of delay. In support of the facts mentioned in the condonation application, the assessee has also filed affidavi....