A.G. Varadarajulu v. State of T.N

4 SCC 231Reported decision1998#20855 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Judgments citing A.G. Varadarajulu v. State of T.N

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHELF DRILLING RON TAPPMEYER LIMITED

The appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-010586-010589 - 2025Supreme Court08 Aug 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 44B

…the whole position and must be understood to have been incorporated in the enactment by the legislature by way of abundant caution and not by way of limiting the ambit and scope of the Special Rules.” 10.2 In A.G. Varadarajulu vs. State of T.N., (1998) 4 SCC 231 (“A.G. Varadarajulu “) this Court relied on the judgment in Aswini Kumar Ghose vs. Arabinda Bose, (1952) 2 SCC 237. This Court while interpreting the non-obstante clause contained in Section 21-A of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961 held: “16. It is well settled that while dealing with a non obstante clause…

RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1763/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…ause. It is equivalent to saying that in spite of the provision of the Act or any other Act mentioned in the non obstante clause … the enactment following it will have its full operation.…‖ 41. Further, this Court in A.G. Varadarajulu v. State of T.N. [(1998) 4 SCC 231], observed that: (SCC p. 236, para 16) ―16. It is well settled that while dealing with a non obstante clause under which the legislature wants to give overriding effect to a section, the Court must try to find out the extent to which the legislature had intended to give one provision overriding effect over another provision.‖ 42. The Bench in A.G.…

M/S RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1881/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: PendingITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…ause. It is equivalent to saying that in spite of the provision of the Act or any other Act mentioned in the non obstante clause … the enactment following it will have its full operation.…‖ 41. Further, this Court in A.G. Varadarajulu v. State of T.N. [(1998) 4 SCC 231], observed that: (SCC p. 236, para 16) ―16. It is well settled that while dealing with a non obstante clause under which the legislature wants to give overriding effect to a section, the Court must try to find out the extent to which the legislature had intended to give one provision overriding effect over another provision.‖ 42. The Bench in A.G.…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - II vs. M/s. Kumar Raja Associates

In the result, all the Tax Revision

ITTA/191/2008HC Telangana23 Mar 2016

Bench: Floor, Opp.Gurudware Bus Stop, Th Stat, 0/O.Meghana Towers, 4 Visakhapatnam. ... Petitioner & M/S.Pulp-N-Pack [P] Limited, Tadimalla ... Respondent : Sri T.C.D.Sekhar, Gp For Commercial Tax Counsel For The Respondent : Sri S Suribabu, Representing On Behalf Of Sri S R R Viswanath Counsel For The Petitioner

For Respondent: Sri T.C.D.Sekhar, GP for Commercial Tax
Section 22

…ion of law that in case of exemption notification / exemption provision, the same is required to be construed literally and the person claiming the exemption must satisfy all the conditions of exemption provision. Paragraphs-9 and 12 are as follows: 24 (2023) 4 SCC 231 34 RNT, J & HN, J TREVC. No. 83 of 2008 & batch m “9. In the case of “expansion or modernization”, the exemption shall be available, if there is an additional production as a result of such modernisation or expansion. In the present case, we are concerned with the case of “diversification”. Therefore, the goods manufactured after diversification…

A.G. Varadarajulu v. State of T.N (4 SCC 231) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax