How many judgments cite 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT?

172 judgments on BharatTax cite 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT (75 ITR 373), spanning 2007 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 153C, Section 148, Section 153A, Section 132.

254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

75 ITR 373Supreme Court of India1970#559 most cited

What is 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure is capital or revenue in nature based on its aim, object, and resultant advantage to the business.

172

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT · 254 ITR 657 (Del) · capital vs revenue expenditure · expenditure for business · aim and object of expenditure · resultant advantage · Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT · International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT · Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 153C Section 148 Section 153A Section 132 Section 132(4)Section 131(1A)

Issues it is cited on

recognised provident fund section 43b(f)section 274(1)section 211 section 50b approved gratuity fund section 40a(9)section 2(45)section 36(l)(iii)wholly and exclusively for business section 271(l)section 32(1)(iia)

Judgments citing 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

M/S. Sharada Paper Company, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 11 (4), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1547/PUN/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1547/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S.Sharada Paper Company, The Income Tax Officer, 436/8, Narayan Peth, Vs Ward-11(4), Pune. Maharashtra – 411030. Pan: Aaffs 1470 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-8, Pune For The Assessment Year 2007-08 Dated 18.07.2019 Arising Out Of Order Under Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 25.03.2013. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal -8) Has Erred In Confirming The Withdrawal Of Claim For The Carry Forward Of Loss For A.Y. 2003-04, A.Y. 2004-05, A.Y.2005-06 & A.Y.2006- 07 Without Verifying The Facts. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal -8) Has Erred In Confirming The Rectification Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 154 & Thereby Withdrawing Loss Allowed In The Assessment Made Under Section 143(3) Of Income Taxact,1961 Without Appreciating The Fact That This Is Not Mistake Apparent From Records & Hence Cannot Be Rectified Under 154 Of The Act.

Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 139(5)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 44A

…tes information as envisaged by section 147 of the Act. In this connection, reference may be made to Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh v. CIT[1959] 35 ITR 1 (SC), CWT v. Imperial Tobacco Co. of India Ltd. [1966] 61 ITR 461 (SC) and V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT/EPT [1970] 75 ITR 373 (SC). 11. The last submission of Mr. Jain has simply to be stated to be rejected. If certain set of facts can form the subject-matter for action under two separate and different statutory provisions, it is for the competent authority to decide under which particular section he has to take action. It is the petitioners' (1 and 2) case that the not…

Hindustan Construction Company, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-6, Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 969/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri H. P. MahajaniFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(2)

…tract of the above judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court reads as under: “9. We may at this juncture also notice the decision of this Court in Hind Wire Industries Ltd.'s case (supra) wherein the decision of this Court in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT/CEPT [1970] 75 ITR 373 interpreting the provisions of section 34 of the Act was reproduced which reads as under: "'Section 34 in terms states that once the Income-tax Officer decides to reopen the assessment, he could do so within the period prescribed by serving on the person liable to pay tax a notice containing all or any of the requirements which may be included in…

Shri Shantinath Bhagwan Jain Shwetambar Murtipujak Sangh, Pune vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

Appeal is allowed

ITA 203/PUN/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 263

…n made but the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that there is under assessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by Explanation 1 to section 147. The Supreme Court adverted to the Judgment in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT [1970] 75 ITR 373 , which held that once an assessment is validly reopened, the previous under assessment is set aside and the Income-tax Officer has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during the previous year. The Court held that the object of section 147 enures to the benefit of the revenue and it is not open to…

Manglam Arts, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 207/JPR/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Aug 2022AY 2018-2019

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 244ASection 250

…to be a capital expenditure being incurred for 3 Mangalam Arts, Jaipur. acquiring, improving, extending, possession or removing defect in the title of fixed assets by referring to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of V. Jaganmohan Rao vs. CIT, 75 ITR 373 (SC). The AO further held that assessee is in possession of the said property and utilizing the same from the beginning and, therefore, the litigation expenses incurred for continued possession of the immovable property where assesee’s office and factory are located is expenditure in relation to immovable property and hence, a capital expenditure…

Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Aurangabad vs. M/S. Hassab Realty Pvt.Ltd, Aurangabad

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 2341/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2341/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Ito, Ward -1(1), Aurangabad

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

Section 143Section 68

…ssessment has already been made but the AO has reason to believe that there is underassessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by Expln. 1 to s. 147. The Supreme Court adverted to the judgment in V. Jaganmohan Rao vs. CIT (1970) 75 ITR 373 (SC), which held that once an assessment is validly reopened, the previous underassessment is set aside and the ITO has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during the previous year. The Court held that the object of s. 147 enures to the benefit of the Revenue and it is not open to the assessee to…

M/S. Shi vs. Hakti Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Osmanabad

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1166/PUN/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Shivshakti Shetkari Vs. Dcit, Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Circle-3, Limited, Nanded Washi Dist., Osmanabad. Pan : Aacts1082Q Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Shabana Khan, Jabalpur vs. Pr-1, Jabalpur. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jabalpur

ITA 29/JAB/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Ravi Mehrotra, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148(1)Section 148(2)Section 263

…this reason that despite Explanation 3 to s. 147, which enables assessment of incomes other than qua which the reassessment proceedings had been initiated, with the law in the matter having been already sufficiently clarified (V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT [1970] 75 ITR 373 (SC); CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 297 (SC)), the Hon‟ble Courts have, as in CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom), held that the same does not override the necessity of conditions set out in the substantive part of sec. 147. 4.2 We are conscious, we may clarify, that all that is necessary at the stage of th…

Kadeer Khan, Jabalpur vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Jabalpur

ITA 28/JAB/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Ravi Mehrotra, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148(1)Section 148(2)Section 263

Achal Kumar Malhotra, Haryana vs. Pr. CIT, Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 455/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, ADvFor Respondent: Shri Ishtiyaque Ahmed, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…d which may come to his notice subsequently, in the course of proceedings under section 147." 12. The Division Bench in Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited (supra)considered the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of V. Jagmohan Rao versus CIT and EPT, (1970) 75 ITR 373(SC) and CIT versus Sun Engineering Works Private Limited, (1992) 198 ITR 297 (SC) and has then elucidated: "18. We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Limited [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom). We may also note that the heading of section 147 is "income escaping…

M/S. Ravi Foundation, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-17, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 884/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms. Arati AggarwalFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar (Sr. AR)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 263(2)

…emplated by the provisions of Section 147(b) read with the Explanation (I) thereto." 9. We may at this juncture also notice the decision of this Court in Hind Wire Industries Ltd (supra) wherein the decision of this Court in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT and CEPT [75 ITR 373] interpreting the provisions of Section 34 of the Act was reproduced which 9 ITA 640/Mum/2021 reads as under: "Section 34 in terms states that once the Income- tax officer decides to reopen the assessment, he could do so within the period prescribed by serving on the person liable to pay tax a notice containing all or any of the requirements which…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Clarion Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 421/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri V.K. ShridharFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…/2016, A.Y. 2009-10 consideration the further facts which had been put up before the Departmental authorities?” The Hon‟ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana considered the judgment of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of V. Jaganmohan Rao Vs. CIT reported in 75 ITR 373 (SC) which held the action of Income Tax Officer in reopening the reassessment proceedings in view of subsequent decision of privy council. Further, also considered the decision of Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. A.J. Zaveri reported in 68 ITR 594 which held that the decision of appellate authority on the same facts may constit…

Clarion Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 331/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri V.K. ShridharFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Institute of Chemical Technology, Mumbai vs. ACIT (E)- I(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3522/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…provisions of section 147(b) read with Explanation (I) thereto." (p. 309) 9. We may at this juncture also notice the decision of this Court in Hind Wire Industries Ltd.'s case (supra) wherein the decision of this Court in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT/CEPT [1970] 75 ITR 373 interpreting the provisions of section 34 of the Act was reproduced which reads as under: "'Section 34 in terms states that once the Income-tax Officer decides to reopen the assessment, he could do so within the period prescribed by serving on the person liable to pay tax a notice containing all or any of the requirements which may be included in…

Royal Western India Turf Club, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT -8, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 640/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri Rajesh Kumar ()

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(2)

…1 ITA 640/Mum/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.640/Mum/2021 (Assessment year 2011-12) Royal Western India Turf Club vs Principal Commissioner of Income- Mahalaxmi Race Course tax-8, Mumbai Mahalxmi, Mumbai-400 034 PAN : AABCR8519H APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by S/Shri Salil Kapoor, Sumit Lalchandani & Smt Ananya Kapoor, AR Respondent by Smt. Sunita Billa, [CIT, (DR)] Date of hearing 23-09-2021 Date of pronouncement 12-10-2021 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey (JM) Captioned appeal has been…

M/S Bindra Warehousing Corporation vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1)

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 153/JAB/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Bleassessment Year : 2008-09 Bindra Warehousing Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-1(1), Corporation, Itarsi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 80Section 80I

…been, in view of the foregoing, formed by the AO, who cannot but be aware of the extant procedure, or is required to be, particularly when the reason formed is based on the provisions of law. As clarified by the Apex Court in Jaganmohan Rao (V.) v. CIT [1970] 75 ITR 373 (SC), it is only the true and correct state of law that can form a basis for the reason to believe escapement of income from assessment. The AO, where he wanted to clear his doubts in the matter, ought to have inquired with the assessee, as u/s. 133(6). No wonder, the law stands amended since (by Finance Act, 2020, w.e.f. 01/4/2020), delinking the…

The Tata Power Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 1307/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri Rajesh Kumar ()

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 147Section 263Section 80I

…emplated by the provisions of Section 147(b) read with the Explanation (I) thereto." 9. We may at this juncture also notice the decision of this Court in Hind Wire Industries Ltd (supra) wherein the decision of this Court in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT and CEPT [75 ITR 373] interpreting the provisions of Section 34 of the Act was reproduced which reads as under: "Section 34 in terms states that once the Income- tax officer decides to reopen the assessment, he could do so within the period prescribed by serving on the person liable to pay tax a notice containing all or any of the requirements which may be included in…

M/S the Karnataka State Co-Operative Apex Bank vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

ITA/392/2016HC Karnataka06 Jul 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 260A

…efore, the earlier order of assessment gets effaced on commencement of proceeding under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Act. It is also urged that Supreme Court in 'V.JAGAN MOHAN RAO VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND EXCESS PROFIT TAX', (1970) 75 ITR 373 (SC) has held that the assessment gets effaced and the subsequent 8 assessment proceedings has to be done afresh. It is also submitted that decision in the case of V.Jagan Mohan Rao was followed by this court in 'CIT VS. MYSORE IRON & STEEL LTD.', (1986) 157 ITR 531 (KAR), 'NITESH BERA (HUF) VS. DCIT', ITA NO.585/2016 and 'THE COMMISSIONER…

Sh. Jeet Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 3068/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anima, Sr. D.R

Section 147Section 148

…caped assessment. The learned counsel relied upon the cases of Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sun Engineering Work Limited 198 ITR 297 and V. Jaganmohan Rao and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income- tax and Excess Profits Tax, Andhra Pradesh (1970) 75 ITR 373 (SC). On the other hand learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the words, „and also‟ in Section 147 signify that unless the Assessing Officer assesses the income with respect to which he has formed reason to believe within the meaning of Section 147, it would not be open for him to assess or reassess any other income chargeable to tax whi…

Spr Infrastructure India Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 638/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Apr 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas (D.R)

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…his possession, reason to believe that there has been underassessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by the provisions of s. 147(b) r/w the Explan. 1 thereto. (Para 7) The principle laid down in V. Jaganmohan Rao's case (1970) 75 ITR 373 (SC) : TC51R.313 is only to the extent that once an assessment is validly reopened by issuance of notice the previous underassessment is set aside and the ITO has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped asessment during the previous year. What is set aside is, only the previous underassessment and not the origin…

El El Hotels & Investments Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 918/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2021AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : B : NEW DELHI (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 ACIT, Vs ELEL Hotels & Investment Ltd., Central Circle 13, C/o Ajay Wadhwa, New Delhi. W-107, Ground Floor, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi. PAN: AAACE2846D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate & Ms Ragini Handa, CA Revenue by : Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 18.12.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 16.02.2021 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is dir…