(2001) 247 ITR 192 (SC). 3. Dy. CIT v. Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd.

248 ITR 81High Court2001#17438 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2023.

Judgments citing (2001) 247 ITR 192 (SC). 3. Dy. CIT v. Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd.

ACC LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ACIT - LTU, MUMBAI

ITA 417/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…n of the legislature is must:- 1. C.W.S. (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (194) 118 CTR (SC) 118: (194) 208ITR 649 (SC). 2. K. Govindan & Sons vs. CIT(200) 164 CTR (SC) 490 : (2001) 247 ITR 192 (SC). 3. Dy. CIT vs. Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd. (2001) 165 CTR (Cal) 489: (2001) 248 ITR 81 (Cal). 13.19 In view of the aforesaid discussion of the appellant’s submission as well as AO’s order and also taking note of the various judicial pronouncements as illustrated above, I am of the considered view that the AO was completely justified in his action of taxing the income arising to the appellant on account of sale of refractory business…

ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5692/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…n of the legislature is must:- 1. C.W.S. (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (194) 118 CTR (SC) 118: (194) 208ITR 649 (SC). 2. K. Govindan & Sons vs. CIT(200) 164 CTR (SC) 490 : (2001) 247 ITR 192 (SC). 3. Dy. CIT vs. Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd. (2001) 165 CTR (Cal) 489: (2001) 248 ITR 81 (Cal). 13.19 In view of the aforesaid discussion of the appellant’s submission as well as AO’s order and also taking note of the various judicial pronouncements as illustrated above, I am of the considered view that the AO was completely justified in his action of taxing the income arising to the appellant on account of sale of refractory business…

ACC LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5655/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…n of the legislature is must:- 1. C.W.S. (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (194) 118 CTR (SC) 118: (194) 208ITR 649 (SC). 2. K. Govindan & Sons vs. CIT(200) 164 CTR (SC) 490 : (2001) 247 ITR 192 (SC). 3. Dy. CIT vs. Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd. (2001) 165 CTR (Cal) 489: (2001) 248 ITR 81 (Cal). 13.19 In view of the aforesaid discussion of the appellant’s submission as well as AO’s order and also taking note of the various judicial pronouncements as illustrated above, I am of the considered view that the AO was completely justified in his action of taxing the income arising to the appellant on account of sale of refractory business…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SANGEETA MISHRA

ITA/423/2004HC Delhi03 Mar 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 158BSection 68

…on the basis of the causes shown by the assessee where the AO is free to accept the justification shown or reject the same. In doing so, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court followed its earlier decision in the case of CIT Vs. Shaw Wallace And Co. Ltd. (2001) 248 ITR 81. The Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court also had an occasion to consider this issue in the case of CIT Vs. Rajendra Prasad Gupta (2001) 248 ITR 35.” 11. The third member, therefore, by order dated 05.04.2002 returned back the matter to the Original Bench for deciding the issue of jurisdiction and then the points of reference on the basis of find…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. KANTI BHAI DAMANI

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/190/2006HC Delhi02 Feb 2012
Section 132Section 158BSection 260ASection 68(2)

…10. The aforesaid decision of the single Judge was made subject matter of challenge before a Division Bench and the decision of the Division Bench is reported as Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Others versus Shaw Wallace and Company Limited, (2001) 248 ITR 81 (Cal.). The Division Bench noticed the amendments made in Chapter XIV-B and addition by way of insertion of an explanation to Section 158BA in view of the conflicting decisions or opinions expressed by various courts. The said explanation was inserted by Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 with retrospective effect from 1st July, 1995 and reads as u…

(2001) 247 ITR 192 (SC). 3. Dy. CIT v. Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd. (248 ITR 81) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax