Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.19 seconds)
Evolutis India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs Acit - Circle 15(1)(2), Mumbai on 23 September, 2021 cites

Max Hospital, Pitampura vs Medical Council Of India on 10 January, 2014

Interestingly, the scope of the applicability of the MCI regulations was looked into by the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Max Hospital, Pitampura Vs. Medical Council of India (CWP No. 1334/2013, dated 10.01.2014). In the aforementioned case the MCI had filed an „Affidavit‟ before the High Court, wherein it was deposed by the council that its jurisdiction is limited only to take action against the registered medical professionals under the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002, and it has no jurisdiction to pass any order affecting the rights/interest of the petitioner hospital. We are of the considered view that on the basis of the aforesaid deposition of MCI that its jurisdiction stands restricted to the registered medical professionals, it can safely be concluded that the MCI regulations would in no way impinge on the functioning of the assessee company which is engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of pharmaceutical and allied products. We thus, in the backdrop of our aforesaid deliberations are of the considered view that the code of conduct enshrined in the MCI regulations are solely meant to be followed and adhered by medical practitioners/doctors, and such a regulation or code of conduct would not cover the pharmaceutical company or healthcare sector in any manner.
Delhi High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 23 - G P Mittal - Full Document

Suo-Moto Case No. 01/2010 (In Re: Sugar ... vs 2.2.1 National Federation Of ... on 30 November, 2011

5. The asessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. The ld. Authorized Representative (for short „A.R‟) for the assessee, at the very outset submitted that as the assessee had incurred the aforesaid expenditure wholly and exclusively in the normal course of its business of trading and distribution of orthopedic implantable devices, therefore, the same was allowable as a deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. Insofar the expenditure that was incurred by the assessee towards holding of conferences was concerned, it was submitted by the ld. A.R that the same was incurred for making the medical professionals conversant about the practical uses of the products that were being traded by the assessee company. It was submitted by the ld. A.R that the conferences organized by the assessee company were witnessed by clinical demonstrations, discussions and debates, interactive participation of the faculty delegates a/w practice sessions and different technique workshops and discussions with the faculty. It was further submitted by the ld. A.R that the expenditure incurred by the assessee company towards travel, stay etc. and payment of honorarium fees qua the workshops that were organized by the assessee in France was also in the nature of an expenditure incurred in the normal course of its business, and accordingly admissible u/s 37(1) of the Act. Further, in support of his claim that the CBDT Circular No. 5/2012, dated 01.08.2012 and the notification of the MCI, dated 10.12.2009 r.w the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics), Regulations, 2002 were not applicable to the assessee which belonged to the health sector industry, the ld. A.R had relied on the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of the Dy. CI- 8(2), Mumbai Vs. PHL Pharma P. Ltd. (2017) 49CCH 124 (Mum)
Competition Commission of India Cites 25 - Cited by 400 - Full Document

The Dcit, (Osd)-1, Circle- 4,, ... vs Liva Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.,, Mumbai on 22 August, 2017

Be that as it may, in the case of Liva Healthcare Ltd. (supra), though the Tribunal had incorporated the relevant provisions and clauses of the Indian Medical Council Regulation 2002, however, it had not elaborated or dwelled upon the issue as to how this MCI regulation which was strictly meant for medical practitioners and doctors could be made applicable to pharmaceutical companies and other health sector industry.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 1 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1