{"id":64141,"date":"2026-08-28T16:20:05","date_gmt":"2026-08-28T10:50:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/asst-cit-v-baxter-pharmaceuticals-india-p-ltd-2026-308-taxman-158-sc-editorial-baxter-pharmaceuticals-india-p-ltd-v-acit-2025-171-taxmann-com-573-gujhc\/"},"modified":"2026-08-28T16:20:05","modified_gmt":"2026-08-28T10:50:05","slug":"asst-cit-v-baxter-pharmaceuticals-india-p-ltd-2026-308-taxman-158-sc-editorial-baxter-pharmaceuticals-india-p-ltd-v-acit-2025-171-taxmann-com-573-gujhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/asst-cit-v-baxter-pharmaceuticals-india-p-ltd-2026-308-taxman-158-sc-editorial-baxter-pharmaceuticals-india-p-ltd-v-acit-2025-171-taxmann-com-573-gujhc\/","title":{"rendered":"Asst. CIT v. Baxter Pharmaceuticals India (P.) Ltd. (2026) 308 Taxman 158 (SC) Editorial: Baxter Pharmaceuticals India (P.) Ltd v. ACIT (2025) 171 taxmann.com 573 (Guj)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessee-company had acquired injectable business from its holding company as a going concern on a slump sale basis and claimed depreciation on the amount of goodwill; assessment was completed u\/s 143(3).\u00a0 After four years, the Assessing Officer issued a reopening notice on the ground that, as a copy of the slump sale was not available on record, depreciation claimed at a rate of 25 per cent on the amount of goodwill was to be disallowed. He further held that the assessee had claimed excess depreciation on assets acquired by it after 1-11-2014. High Court held that there was no failure on part of assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts for assessment; hence, reassessment was quashed. SLP of the revenue was dismissed.\u00a0 (AY. 2015-16 to 2017-18)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Depreciation-Slump sale-Goodwill-High Court quashed the reassessment proceedings-SLP of revenue dismissed. [S. 32, 143(3), 148, Art. 136]  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-64141","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-gGx","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64141","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=64141"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64141\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":64142,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64141\/revisions\/64142"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=64141"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=64141"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=64141"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}