398 BHANUMATI AND OTHERS v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS (12 SCC 1)

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI 1 vs. M/S AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD.

Appeal is dismissed being covered

ITA/511/2025HC Delhi10 Oct 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

…ITA 511/2025 Page 1 of 12 $~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 10.10.2025 + ITA 511/2025 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI 1.....Appellant Through: Mr. Vipul Agrawal, SSC with Ms. Sakshi Shairwal, Mr. Akshat Singh, JSCs and Mr. Gaoraang Ranjan and Ms Harshita Kotru, Advs. versus M/S AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mayank Nagi and Mr. Tarun Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE…

ALTHI VENKATA NARENDRA RAJU,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

ITA 1247/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon'Ble Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri N.V.Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 153(3)

…ITA No.1247 & SA No.49/Chny/2025 आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं माननीय श्री अमिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON'BLE SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1247/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./SA No.49/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2014-15 Althi Venkata Narendra Raju, No.1/355, Kamarajar Salai, Siruseri, Chennai-600 130. [PAN: ACUPN4840M] Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Chenna…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, DELHI vs. SMT. SANGEETA SAWHNEY

ITA/73/2024HC Delhi13 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

Section 29ASection 34

…express bar in the contract between the parties, it is the Arbitrator who enjoys absolute discretion and has the jurisdiction to award interest including post-award interest. [Ref.: State of Rajasthan v. Ferro Concrete Construction Private Limited, (2009) 12 SCC 1; and Indian Railway Construction Company Limited v. National Buildings Construction Corporation Limited, (2023) 7 SCC 390]. Clearly, the Deed of Settlement contains no express bar regarding interest and it was thus open to the Arbitrator to award the interest. Once interest is awarded by the Arbitrator, Section 37(1)(b) comes into play where t…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

ITA 901/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth RankaFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

…non neganti incumbit probatio": The burden of proof lies on the person asserting a fact. It was incumbent upon Banka and the assessee to provide credible evidence substantiating their claims. c) Judgment Reference: • In Union of India v. Pramod Gupta [(2005) 12 SCC 1], the Hon’ble Supreme Court emphasized that an affidavit lacking corroborative evidence cannot be accepted as conclusive proof. • In CIT v. Durga Prasad More [(1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC)], the Court held that explanations contrary to human probabilities must be rejected. 8.1. Conclusion and Prayer: In light of the above submissions, it is humbly submitt…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4 DELHI vs. JOHNSON MATTHEY INDIA PVT LTD

ITA/114/2023HC Delhi07 Jan 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 11(5)Section 16Section 34Section 37(2)(a)

…in the contract between the parties, it is the Arbitrator who enjoys absolute discretion and has the jurisdiction to award interest including post-award interest. [Ref.: State of Rajasthan and Another v. Ferro Concrete Construction Private Limited, (2009) 12 SCC 1; and Indian Railway Construction Company Limited v. National Buildings Construction Corporation Limited, (2023) 7 SCC 390]. Clearly, the Deed of Settlement contains no express bar regarding interest and it was thus open to the Arbitrator to award the interest. Once interest is awarded by the Arbitrator, Section 37(1)(b) comes into play where t…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. INDRANI PATNAIK

ITA/4/2021HC Orissa21 Nov 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO

Section 120BSection 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)Section 17Section 26Section 42

…r the ED would submit that the learned Appellate Tribunal erred in setting aside the freezing order solely due to the absence of a prosecution complaint 8(2008) 14 SCC 208 92025 SCC OnLine SC 449 10(2023) 12 SCC 1 Digitally Signed By:HARVINDER KAUR BHATIA Signing Date:14.11.2025 17:05:28 Signature Not Verified MISC. APPEAL (PMLA) 4/2021 and 5/2021 Page 8 of 31 against the Respondent, since a complaint had already been filed against her husband within the prescribed time, and as held by th…

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX vs. M/S SAFARI RETREATS PRIVATE LIMITED

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

C.A. No.-002948-002948 - 2023Supreme Court03 Oct 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

Section 17Section 17(5)(c)Section 17(5)(d)

…to prevent the cascading effect of multiplicity of taxes. The cascading effect of taxes can be removed only by introducing a system for allowance of ITC so that there would not be any missing link in the chain or series of 10 (1969) 2 SCC 55 11 (2017) 12 SCC 1 12 (2021) 15 SCC 534 13 (1983) 1 SCC 147 Civil Appeal No.2948 of 2023 etc. Page 12 of 91 transactions culminating into deliverable goods and services or both to the ultimate end-user, who is the customer. Reliance has been placed on the observations made by this Court in the case of Union of India & Anr v. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Lt…

COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, PATNA vs. M/S. SHAPOORJI PALOONJI AND COMPANY PVT LTD AND ORS

The appeals are dismissed, without

C.A. No.-003991-003991 - 2023Supreme Court13 Oct 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA

Section 66BSection 66DSection 93

…t interpretation of the term “governmental authority” could unfairly burden the exchequer. Reliance was placed on the decision of a Constitution Bench of this Court in 4 (2022) SCC OnLine SC 1093 5 (2009) 5 SCC 641 6 (2022) SCC OnLine SC 1122 7 (2017) 12 SCC 1 8 (1961) 3 SCR 386 11 Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai vs. Dilip Kumar and Company & Ors.9 wherein it was held that any notification or a clause granting an exemption must be interpreted strictly and literally, with any ambiguity resolved in favour of the revenue. f) IIT Patna and NIT Rourkela are institutions incorporated under c…

ULTRATECH CEMENT LIMITED vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS

WA/200056/2021HC Karnataka22 Dec 2022

Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR,K S HEMALEKHA

Section 4

…to the material on record and the same deserve to be quashed. In support of their contentions, reliance is placed upon the following judgments:- a) City Municipal Council Bhalki v. Gurappa - (2016) 2 SCC 200; b) Union of India v. Pramod Gupta - (2005) 12 SCC 1; - 65 - c) State of Orissa v. Sudhanshu Sekhar Misra - AIR 1968 SC 647; d) Uttaranchal Road Transport Corporation v. Mansaram Nainwal - (2006) 6 SCC 366; e) Padmasundara Rao v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 2002 SC 1334; f) Grasim Industries Ltd. v. Collector of Customs Bombay (2002)4 SCC 297; g) U.P. Cooperative Cane Union Federation Ltd v…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2 vs. IMPERIAL HOUSING VENTURES P. LTD.

Accordingly, LPA 362/2020 is allowed,

ITA/86/2022HC Delhi13 Apr 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

Section 5Section 5(3)Section 8(3)

…dinance, 202010, at paragraph 32 of the Impugned Judgment dated 18.11.2020 is misplaced, because the Ordinance did not list the PMLA as one of the specified Acts, but the Supreme 7 (2007) 11 SCC 447 8 (2021) 12 SCC 1 9 CrPC 10 TOL Ordinance, 2020 Digitally Signed By:HARVINDER KAUR BHATIA Signing Date:25.09.2025 14:40:47 Signature Not Verified LPA 362/2020 & W.P.(CRL) 86/2022 Page 6 of 53 Court‘s directions in In re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation (supra) operated under A…

M/S. SHEO SHAKTI COKE INDUSTRIES vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 37, KOLKATA

In the result, the writ petition is dismissed

ITAT/1/2022HC Calcutta08 Apr 2022

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

Section 33A

…dal Stainless Limited was considered in Patina Gold Ornaments and the decision has been rendered in favour of the dealer. It is further submitted that the decision in 12 1969 (2) SCC 746 13 (2017) 12 SCC 1 14 (2018) 9 SCC 1 WPTT NO. 01 OF 2022 REPORTABLE Page 9 of 18 Dilip Kumar will not apply to the facts of the case on hand as it pertains to entitlement of general exemption and not deductio…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SHRI ASHOK AGARWAL HUF

ITA/4/2021HC Rajasthan16 Nov 2021

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,REKHA BORANA

Section 120BSection 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)Section 17Section 26Section 42

…r the ED would submit that the learned Appellate Tribunal erred in setting aside the freezing order solely due to the absence of a prosecution complaint 8(2008) 14 SCC 208 92025 SCC OnLine SC 449 10(2023) 12 SCC 1 Digitally Signed By:HARVINDER KAUR BHATIA Signing Date:14.11.2025 17:05:28 Signature Not Verified MISC. APPEAL (PMLA) 4/2021 and 5/2021 Page 8 of 31 against the Respondent, since a complaint had already been filed against her husband within the prescribed time, and as held by th…