GLAXOSMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 7(1)(1) AND 3 ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

1 47-_WP_1748_of_2022(2).docx Tikam VAISHALI ANIL IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TIKAM ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Digitally signed by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM WRIT PETITION NO. 1748 OF 2022 Date: 2025.03.19 17:02:04 +0530 GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. …Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1) and Ors. …Respondents ______________________________________________________ Mr. Nishant Thakkar a/w. Ms. Jasmin Analsadvala a/w. Mr. Bhavesh Bhatia i/b. Lumiere Law Partner, for the Petitioner. Mr. P.A. Narayanan, for the Respondent- Revenue. ______________________________________________________ CORAM M.S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ. DATED: 10 March 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT : [Per Jitendra Jain, J.] 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable immediately at the request and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. This petition challenges a notice under section 148 of the Income -tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 30 March 2021 for the assessment year 2013-14. 4. The petitioner filed its return of income on 30 November 2013. The said return was selected for scrutiny assessment and the petitioner in the course of the assessment proceedings, pursuant to various queries raised by the 2 47-_WP_1748_of_2022(2).docx assessing officer, filed various details, including the details on which the impugned proceedings are initiated. 5. On 22 February 2017, an assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed disallowing certain percentage of expenses on samples given to doctors on the ground that same constitutes sale promotion expenses incurred on the doctor. The said order is a subject matter of an appeal. We are informed that the said appeal is pending as of today. 6. On 30 March 2021, impugned