103 Taxman 342/237 ITR 24 (SO; Federation of Andhra Pradesh Chambers of Commerce & Industry v. State of AP

247 ITR 36Supreme Court of India2001#4321 most cited

What is 103 Taxman 342/237 ITR 24 (SO; Federation of Andhra Pradesh Chambers of Commerce & Industry v. State of AP authority for?

Courts and Tribunals cannot grant relief beyond statutory provisions.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

103 Taxman 342 · 237 ITR 24 · Federation of Andhra Pradesh Chambers of Commerce & Industry v. State of AP · 247 ITR 36 · 115 Taxmann 143 · statutory provision · relief · courts · tribunals

Also reported as

115 Taxmann 143

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBGSection 115JBSection 115PSection 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)(iv)Section 143(3)Section 144C(10)Section 144C(13)

Judgments citing 103 Taxman 342/237 ITR 24 (SO; Federation of Andhra Pradesh Chambers of Commerce & Industry v. State of AP

ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Jaydeep Profiles P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3236/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2), Jaydeep Profiles P. Ltd., R No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar 142/7 Lakdi Bunder Road, बनाम/ Bhavan, M.K.Road, Darukhana, Reay Road, Vs. Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai 400 086 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacj8998B Assessment Year: 2009-10 Jaydeep Profiles P. Ltd., Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2), 142/7 Lakdi Bunder Road, R No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar बनाम/ Darukhana, Reay Road, Bhavan, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai 400 086 Mumbai 400 020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaacj8998B 2 & 2698/Mum/2016

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

…er the search cannot be said to be bad in law." 60. Reliance placed by the learned counsel on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT v. Plantation Corporation of Kerala (supra) and Andhra Pradesh Chambers v. State of AP and Ors. (2001) 247 ITR 36 (SC) holding that resort to any interpretative process to unfold legislative intent in a case where statutory language is clear, is impermissible, is misplaced, as the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Arti Gases (supra) is a direct decision involving interpretation of the relevant provisions contained in the IT Act, 1961.…

Jaydeep Profiles Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO WD 6 (3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2698/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2), Jaydeep Profiles P. Ltd., R No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar 142/7 Lakdi Bunder Road, बनाम/ Bhavan, M.K.Road, Darukhana, Reay Road, Vs. Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai 400 086 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacj8998B Assessment Year: 2009-10 Jaydeep Profiles P. Ltd., Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2), 142/7 Lakdi Bunder Road, R No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar बनाम/ Darukhana, Reay Road, Bhavan, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai 400 086 Mumbai 400 020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaacj8998B 2 & 2698/Mum/2016

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

…er the search cannot be said to be bad in law." 60. Reliance placed by the learned counsel on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT v. Plantation Corporation of Kerala (supra) and Andhra Pradesh Chambers v. State of AP and Ors. (2001) 247 ITR 36 (SC) holding that resort to any interpretative process to unfold legislative intent in a case where statutory language is clear, is impermissible, is misplaced, as the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Arti Gases (supra) is a direct decision involving interpretation of the relevant provisions contained in the IT Act, 1961.…

Aadhunik Infrastructure Development Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Gauri Plasticulture Pvt. Ltd., Jalgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jalgaon

ITA 1944/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 143(2)Section 2(22)(e)

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण “ए” न्यायऩीठ ऩुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE श्री अननऱ चतुर्वेदी, ऱेखा सदस्य, एर्वं श्री वर्वकास अर्वस्थी, न्यानयक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / ITA No.1944/PUN/2014 ननधाारण र्वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Aadhunik Infrastructure Development Pvt. Ltd., (Formerly known as Gauri Plasticulture Pvt. Ltd.), Jain Pipe Park, Old Dhulia Road, Jalgaon – 425001 PAN : AAACJ4463B .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), Jalgaon ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri…

DCIT Cir.7(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Pjl Clothing India Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2596/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010 - 2011 Dcit Circle 7(3)(1) Pjl Clothing India Ltd., Mumbai बनाम/ Unit No.19, Shree Madhu Estate, Pandurang Budhakar Vs. Marg, Worli, Mumbai 400 018 (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacp2782R

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…to be bad in law." 33 PJL Clothing India Ltd. 60. Reliance placed by the learned counsel on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT v. Plantation Corporation of Kerala (supra) and Andhra Pradesh Chambers v. State of AP and Ors. (2001) 247 ITR 36 (SC) holding that resort to any interpretative process to unfold legislative intent in a case where statutory language is clear, is impermissible, is misplaced, as the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Arti Gases (supra) is a direct decision involving interpretation of the relevant provisions contained in the IT Act, 1961.…

Stitchwell Qualitex (Rf) vs. Income Tax Officer & Anr

The appeal is allowed with no order as to

ITA/346/2002HC Delhi16 Sept 2015
Section 143Section 260Section 32

…us. 6. Aggrieved with the above order of the CIT (A), the Revenue went in appeal before the ITAT. The ITAT referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Federation of Andhra Pradesh Chambers of Commerce and Industry v. State of Andhra Pradesh [2001] 247 ITR 36 (SC) and concluded that “in order to claim depreciation, it is important, inter alia, that the asset must be actually used for the purpose of business.” Accordingly, it 2015:DHC:7715-DB ITA 346/2002 Page 4 of 6 was…

The State of Karnataka vs. M/S Piem Hotels Ltd

LTRP/8/2010HC Karnataka28 Aug 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 11Section 11ASection 2Section 4Section 5Section 6(2)

…- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF AUGUST 2013 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B MANOHAR LTRP No.8/2010 c/w LTRP Nos.9/2010, 10/2010 and 1/2011 Between: The State of Karnataka, By the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Vanijya Terige Karyalaya, Gandhinagar, Bangalore-560 009 …COMMON PETITIONER (By Smt.S.Sujatha, AGA) And: M/s.Piem Hotels Limited (Taj Residency), No.41/3, M.G.Road, Bangalore-1. … RESPONDENT In LTRP No.8/2010 M/s.The Taj West End,…

Commissioner of Income Tax - II vs. M/s. Healthware Private Limited

ITTA/204/2013HC Telangana04 Jul 2013