28 and 29, Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah (dead) & Ors.

6 SCC 342Reported decision1996#10841 most cited

What is 28 and 29, Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah (dead) & Ors. authority for?

This case supports the proposition of law that instructions and directions issued by the Income Tax Board under Section 119 of the Act are to be observed and followed by income-tax authorities for the proper administration of the Act.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah · Section 119 · Income Tax Act · instructions to subordinate authorities · proper administration of Act · Board's directions

Issues it is cited on

section 11(5)section 119(2)section 11(2)section 119(2)(b)section 254(1)advance taxsection 80g(5)tax deducted at sourcesection 119registration under section 12asection 40(a)reasoned order

Judgments citing 28 and 29, Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah (dead) & Ors.

Ram Niwas Modi Charitable Society, Jaipur vs. CIT-Exemption, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are disposed off

ITA 118/JPR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Nov 2025AY 2022-23
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, Ld. JCIT
Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

…osition of law. (See Priyanka Overseas (P.) Ltd.&Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.1991 Suppl. (1) SCC 102, para 39, Union of India & Ors. v. Maj. Gen. (Retd.) Madan Lal Yadav (1996) 4 SCC 127 at 142, paras 28 and 29, Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah (dead) & Ors. (1996) 6 SCC 342 at 345, para 7, Sushil Kumar v. Rakesh Kumar (2003) 8 SCC 673 at 692, para 65, first sentence, Kusheshwar Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar & Ors. (2007) 11 SCC 447, paras 13, 14 and 16).' 5. Yet however, in the entire order the Id. CIT(E) has not demonstrated how he could find such activities to be sham or fake or made-up affair. It is not his case t…

Navbharat Cheritable Trust, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bharuch

In the result, all these three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 27/SRT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi Jhagadia, Bharuch, Ward-1, Vs. Gujarat, Pin-393115 Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(10)Section 254(1)

…ition of law. (See Priyanka Overseas (P.) Ltd.& Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. 1991 Suppl. (1) SCC 102, para 39, Union of India & Ors. v. Maj. Gen. (Retd.) Madan Lal Yadav (1996) 4 SCC 127 at 142, paras 28 and 29, Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah (dead) & Ors. (1996) 6 SCC 342 at 345, para 7, Sushil Kumar v. Rakesh Kumar (2003) 8 SCC 673 at 692, para 65, first sentence, Kusheshwar Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar & Ors. (2007) 11 SCC 447, paras 13, 14 and 16).' 30. Section 119 of the Act is couched in very wide terms. The same is quoted below for ready reference : Instructions to subordinate authorities: "119. (1) the Boar…

Navbharat Charitable Trust, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Bharuch

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 385/SRT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(10)Section 254(1)Section 80G

…ition of law. (See Priyanka Overseas (P.) Ltd.& Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. 1991 Suppl. (1) SCC 102, para 39, Union of India & Ors. v. Maj. Gen. (Retd.) Madan Lal Yadav (1996) 4 SCC 127 at 142, paras 28 and 29, Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah (dead) & Ors. (1996) 6 SCC 342 at 345, para 7, Sushil Kumar v. Rakesh Kumar (2003) 8 SCC 673 at 692, para 65, first sentence, Kusheshwar Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar & Ors. (2007) 11 SCC 447, paras 13, 14 and 16).' 30. Section 119 of the Act is couched in very wide terms. The same is quoted below for ready reference : Instructions to subordinate authorities: "119. (1) the Boar…

Navbharat Charitable Trust, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Bharuch

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 384/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(10)Section 254(1)Section 80G

…ition of law. (See Priyanka Overseas (P.) Ltd.& Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. 1991 Suppl. (1) SCC 102, para 39, Union of India & Ors. v. Maj. Gen. (Retd.) Madan Lal Yadav (1996) 4 SCC 127 at 142, paras 28 and 29, Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah (dead) & Ors. (1996) 6 SCC 342 at 345, para 7, Sushil Kumar v. Rakesh Kumar (2003) 8 SCC 673 at 692, para 65, first sentence, Kusheshwar Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar & Ors. (2007) 11 SCC 447, paras 13, 14 and 16).' 30. Section 119 of the Act is couched in very wide terms. The same is quoted below for ready reference : Instructions to subordinate authorities: "119. (1) the Boar…

Navbharat Charitable Trust, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Bharuch

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 383/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(10)Section 254(1)Section 80G

…ition of law. (See Priyanka Overseas (P.) Ltd.& Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. 1991 Suppl. (1) SCC 102, para 39, Union of India & Ors. v. Maj. Gen. (Retd.) Madan Lal Yadav (1996) 4 SCC 127 at 142, paras 28 and 29, Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah (dead) & Ors. (1996) 6 SCC 342 at 345, para 7, Sushil Kumar v. Rakesh Kumar (2003) 8 SCC 673 at 692, para 65, first sentence, Kusheshwar Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar & Ors. (2007) 11 SCC 447, paras 13, 14 and 16).' 30. Section 119 of the Act is couched in very wide terms. The same is quoted below for ready reference : Instructions to subordinate authorities: "119. (1) the Boar…

Dongfang Electric Corporation, Kolkata vs. DCIT, International Taxation 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 487/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sri N.V. Vasudevan & Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

Section 143(3)

…ssue of lack of reference was not disputed by the assessee for the Assessment Year 2010-11. Reliance was placed on the following case laws:- • Strategic Credit Capital Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., Versus Ratnakar Bank Ltd. [395 ITR 391] • Amiya Bala Paul vs. CIT (2003) 6 SCC 342 • SPL’s Siddhartha Ltd [2012] 345 ITR 223 5.3. He submitted that there is no reference made by the AO to the TPO, in terms of section 92 CA of the Act, the assessment order for the Assessment Year 2009-10, was required to be passed by 31/12/ 2012, and as the assessment order was passed on 31/01/2014, the assessment is barred by limitation and th…

Dongfang Electric Corporation, Kolkata vs. DDIT (It)-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 572/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Oct 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri N.V. Vasudevan & Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

Section 143(3)

…ssue of lack of reference was not disputed by the assessee for the Assessment Year 2010-11. Reliance was placed on the following case laws:- • Strategic Credit Capital Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., Versus Ratnakar Bank Ltd. [395 ITR 391] • Amiya Bala Paul vs. CIT (2003) 6 SCC 342 • SPL’s Siddhartha Ltd [2012] 345 ITR 223 5.3. He submitted that there is no reference made by the AO to the TPO, in terms of section 92 CA of the Act, the assessment order for the Assessment Year 2009-10, was required to be passed by 31/12/ 2012, and as the assessment order was passed on 31/01/2014, the assessment is barred by limitation and th…

Dr(Smt) Sujatha Ramesh vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes

WP/54672/2015HC Karnataka24 Oct 2017

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

Section 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 119(2)(c)Section 54Section 54E

…1/25 ® IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI WRIT PETITION No.54672/2015 (T-IT) BETWEEN: DR.(SMT.)SUJATHA RAMESH No.219, 6TH MAIN, 6TH BLOCK, BEL LAYOUT, VIDYARANYAPURA BANGALORE – 560 097. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI V RAGHURAMAN, ADVOCATE) AND 1. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE D-1/35, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI – 110 001. 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BENGALURU – II, C.R.BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BA…

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. M/s. Nava Bharat Ferro Alloys Ltd

ITTA/392/2013HC Telangana05 Sept 2013

B.M.Malani vs. Commr.of Income Tax

The appeal is allowed accordingly to the aforementioned extent

C.A. No.-005950-005950 - 2008Supreme Court01 Oct 2008
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 220Section 245C

…f law. [See Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & ors. 1991 Suppl. (1) SCC 102, para 39, Union of India & ors. v. Major General Madan Lal Yadav (Retd.) (1996) 4 SCC 127 at 142, paras 28 and 29, Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah (dead) & ors. (1996) 6 SCC 342 at 345, para 7, Sushil Kumar v. Rakesh Kumar (2003) 8 SCC 673 at 692, para 65, first 10 sentence, Kusheshwar Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar & ors. (2007) 11 scc 447, paras 13, 14 and 16). Thus, the said principle, in our opinion, should be applied even in a case of this nature. A statutory authority despite receipt of such a request could have…

28 and 29, Ashok Kapil v. Sana Ullah (dead) & Ors. (6 SCC 342) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax