12 SCC 505; West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd.

Mumtaz Dilawar Gani, Bharuch vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Bharuch

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं/.Ita Nos.1442 & 1443/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 & 2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Mumtaz Dilawar Gani Income Tax Officer, 6, White House, Near Railway Ward-1, Bharuch Vs. Crossing, Dahej Byepass Road, Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bharuch-392001 Bharuch "थायीलेखासं /.जीआइआरसं /.Pan/Gir No.: Adcpg 1175 D (अपीलाथ" /Assessee ) (""थ" /Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Krutarth Desai, Advocate & Ms. Disha Kharod, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23/05/2023

…v. Rajat Vidyarthi [2009] 3 SCC 287; Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) v. Vijay Dasharath Patel [2007] 4 SCC 118; Metroark Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta [2004] 12 SCC 505; West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd. [2002] 8 SCC 715).' 13. Further, in Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works case (supra) the Supreme Court has held as follows: '19. xxx There is a clear finding of fact by the Tribunal that the legal expenses incurred by the assessee were for protecting its business and that the expenses were incurred after November 18, 1994. There is no reason to reverse this finding of fac…

Mumtaz Dilawar Gani, Bharuch vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Bharuch

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं/.Ita Nos.1442 & 1443/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 & 2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Mumtaz Dilawar Gani Income Tax Officer, 6, White House, Near Railway Ward-1, Bharuch Vs. Crossing, Dahej Byepass Road, Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bharuch-392001 Bharuch "थायीलेखासं /.जीआइआरसं /.Pan/Gir No.: Adcpg 1175 D (अपीलाथ" /Assessee ) (""थ" /Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Krutarth Desai, Advocate & Ms. Disha Kharod, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23/05/2023

…v. Rajat Vidyarthi [2009] 3 SCC 287; Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) v. Vijay Dasharath Patel [2007] 4 SCC 118; Metroark Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta [2004] 12 SCC 505; West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd. [2002] 8 SCC 715).' 13. Further, in Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works case (supra) the Supreme Court has held as follows: '19. xxx There is a clear finding of fact by the Tribunal that the legal expenses incurred by the assessee were for protecting its business and that the expenses were incurred after November 18, 1994. There is no reason to reverse this finding of fac…

The Official Liquidator of vs. Registrar of Trade Marks

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

…as 627 3. State of Kerala Vs. Official Liquidator (1897) 1 KLT 801 4. DR. S.P. Bhargava Vs. Haryana Electric Steel Co. Ltd., 1994 SCC Online P&H 395 5. Bacchaj Nahar vs. Nilima Mandal &Anr (2008) 17 SCC 491 6. West Bengal Electricity Vs. CESC Ltd (2002) 8 SCC 715 7. S.V. Kandeakar Vs. V.M. Deshpande, (1972) 1 SCC 438 8. Allahabad Bank Vs. Canara Bank, (2000) 4 SCC 406 9. Ultra (UK) Ltd Vs. Gary Fielding ,Northstar Systems Limited And Seaquest Systems Limited And Ors. AND Northstar Systems Limited (In liquidation) And Seaquest Systems limited (In Liqui…

Central Board of Direct Taxes vs. Smt Anuradha Goyal

35. In view of the above, we pass the following:

Bench: B.VEERAPPA,H.P.SANDESH

…of the record justifying the Court to exercise its power of review. A review is by no means an appeal in disguise whereby an erroneous decision is reheard and corrected, but lies only for patent error. This Court in Parsion Devi v. Sumitri Devi [(1997) 8 SCC 715] held as under : (SCC pp. 718-19, paras 7-9) “7. It is well settled that review proceedings have to be strictly confined to the ambit and scope of Order 47 Rule 1 CPC. In Thungabhadra Industries Ltd. v. Govt. of A.P. [AIR 1964 SC 1372] this Court opined : (AIR p. 1377, para 11) ‘11. What, however, we are now concerned with is…

M/S Sheo Shakti Coke Industries vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 37, Kolkata

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…missed on December 13, 2021. After the Special Leave to Appeal being dismissed the petitioner has filed the present review application. 17 (g) A review petition has a limited purpose and cannot be allowed to be an appeal in disguise as held in 1997 8 SCC 715 (Parsion Devi & Ors. v. Sumitri Devi & Ors.) as approved by the Constitutional Bench in 2021(3) SCC 1 (Beghar Foundation [THROUGH ITS SECRETARY] & Anr. v. K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Ors.). Although, a judgment operates retrospectively as held in 2008 (14) SCC 171 (Assistant Commissioner, Income Tax, Rajkot v. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange L…

ACIT, Circle-1, Bharuch vs. Bell Ceramics Ltd, Bharuch

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.577/SRT/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Virtual Court Hearing) The ACIT, Circle-1, Vs. Bell Ceramics Ltd., Bharuch. Village. Dopra, Taluka. Amod, District. Bharuch, Bharuch-392230. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACB9403B Revenue/Appellant Assessee/Respondent Assessee by : Ms Amrin Pathan, AR Revenue by : Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 05/04/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 05/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captio…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Bahubali Neminath Muttin

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,RAGHVENDRA S.CHAUHAN

…Rajat Vidyarthi [2009] 3 SCC 287; Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Vs. Vijay Dasharath Patel [2007] 4 SCC 118; Metroark Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta [2004] 12 SCC 505; West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission Vs. CESC Ltd. [2002] 8 SCC 715).” 13. Further, in Mangalore Ganesh Beedi works case supra the Supreme Court has held as follows: “19. xxx There is a clear finding of fact by the Tribunal that the legal expenses incurred by the assessee were for protecting its business and that the expenses were incurred after November 18, 1994. There is no reason to reverse this finding of fact…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Bahubali Neminath Muttin

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,RAGHVENDRA S.CHAUHAN

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 5027/2011 C/W INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 5028/2011 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.5027/2011: BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax Khemjibai Complex, Dr. Ambedakar Road, Belgaum. 2. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle –1, Belgaum. … APPELLANTS (Shri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Advocate) AND: M/s. Bahubali Neminath Muttin Main Road at Post Chandachan R 2 Taluk Indi, District Bijapur – 586 205. … RESPONDENT (S…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Bahubali Neminath Muttin

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,RAGHVENDRA S.CHAUHAN

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 5026/2011 C/W INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 5025/2011 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.5026/2011: BETWEEN: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax Khemjibai Complex, Dr. Ambedakar Road, Belgaum. 2. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle –1, Belgaum. … APPELLANTS (Shri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Advocate) AND: M/s. Bahubali Neminath Muttin Main Road at Post Chandachan 2 Taluk Indi, District Bijapur – 586 205. … RESPONDENT (…

The Commissioner of Income Tax -III vs. Sri T.C. Reddy

The appeal stands dismissed

…dra Gopal Vidyarthi Vs. Rajat Vidyarthi5; Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Vs. Vijay Dasharath Patel6; Metroark Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta7; West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission Vs. CESC Ltd.8) (2002) 8 SCC 715.” 4.5 He has also relied upon the decision of Bombay High Court in CIT vs Shah Construction Co. Ltd. (1998) 230 ITR 51 (Bom) wherein it has been held as under:- “ So far as the assessee was concerned, the amount of Rs.2,81,331/- was receivable a service charges from Builders International (India) Ltd. in the previous year relev…

Chandna Impex P.Ltd vs. Commr.of Customs

The appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated

…eptions are where (i) the courts below have ignored material evidence or acted on no evidence; (ii) the courts have drawn wrong inferences from proved facts by applying the law erroneously; or (iii) the courts have wrongly cast the burden 3 (2002) 8 SCC 715 4 (2004) 12 SCC 505 5 (2007) 4 SCC 118 6 (2009) 3 SCC 287 7 (2006) 5 SCC 545 8 AIR 1962 SC 1314 8 of proof. When we refer to “decision based on no evidence”, it not only refers to cases where there is a total dearth of evidence, but also refers to any case, where the evidence, taken as a whole, is not reasonably capable of supporti…

Vijay Kumar Talwar vs. Commnr. of Income Tax, Delhi

The appeals are dismissed

…n his books of account. In the absence of any cogent evidence, a bald explanation furnished by the assessee about the source of the credits in question viz., realisation 4 (1980) 4 SCC 255 5 (2009) 3 SCC 287 6 (2007) 4 SCC 118 7 (2004) 12 SCC 505 8 (2002) 8 SCC 715 1 from the debtors of the erstwhile firm, in the opinion of the assessing officer, was not satisfactory. It is well settled that in view of Section 68 of the Act, where any sum is found credited in the books of the assessee for any previous year, the same may be charged to income tax as the income of the assessee of that previous y…

Commnr. of Customs (Preventive) vs. Vijay Dasharath Patel

The appeals are allowed

…and Metroark Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta [(2004) 12 SCC 505].} Even in a case where evidence is misread, the High Court would have power to interfere. {See West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission vs. CESC Ltd. [(2002) 8 SCC 715]; and also Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai vs. Bureau Veritas & Ors. [(2005) 3 SCC 265].} http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 12 In M/s. Dutta Cycle Stores & Ors. vs. Gita Devi Sultania & Ors. [(1990) 1 SCC 586], this Court held : "Whether or not rent for the two months in question had been duly paid by the d…

Kirloskar Bros. Ltd vs. Comnr. of Central Excise, Pune

…another view is possible, that is no ground for substitution of that view in exercise of power under clause (b) of Section 130-E of the Act.’’ The position was reiterated in West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd., [2002] 8 SCC 715, Commissioner of Customs, Chennai v. Adani Exports Ltd. and Anr., [2004] 4 SCC 367 and recently in Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai v. M/s Bureau Veritas and Ors., JT (2005) 2 SC 348. Above being the position, we find no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.…

Commnr. of Customs, Mumbai vs. M/S. Bureau Veritas

…another view is possible, that is no ground for substitution of that view in exercise of power under clause (b) of Section 130-E of the Act." The position was reiterated in West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd., [2002] 8 SCC 715 and Commissioner of Customs, Chennai v. Adani Exports Ltd. and Anr., [2004] 4 SCC 367. In the instant case Tribunal has referred to various materials which can by no stretch of imagination be termed irrelevant. The authenticity, credibility or reliability of the data has not been questioned. The inference to be drawn from these materials falls with…

Commnr. of Customs, Chennai vs. Adani Exports Ltd

…vs. Swastic Woolens (P) Ltd. & Ors. (1988 Suppl. SC 796) to contend this Court has always treated the Tribunal as the final forum on facts and further relied on a judgment of this Court in West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission vs. CESC Ltd. (2002 8 SCC 715) to contend that unless the finding of fact of such forum is perverse or not based on material-on-record, this Court would not interfere with such a finding of fact. Having noticed the arguments of the parties, it is clear that the issue before us is one of fixation of value on imported Vitamin Mixes, credit for which is sought by the…