ACCE v. Dunlop India Ltd.

154 ITR 172Supreme Court of India1985#1957 most cited

What is ACCE v. Dunlop India Ltd. authority for?

The Indian judicial system operates on a hierarchical structure where lower courts, including High Courts, must loyally accept and follow the decisions rendered by higher appellate tribunals like the Supreme Court. This principle ensures the proper functioning and consistency of the judicial system.

58

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ACCE v. Dunlop India Ltd. · 154 ITR 172 · Supreme Court decisions binding · judicial hierarchy India · stare decisis · precedent lower courts · acceptance of higher court decisions · binding authority of SC · judicial discipline · lower tier accept higher tier decisions

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 144CSection 35D

Issues it is cited on

section 92f(ii)section 92f(v)section 41(2)section 80hhesection 35absection 41(4)section 80ia(1)section 43b(f)section 92basection 80ia(5)section 10basection 42

Judgments citing ACCE v. Dunlop India Ltd.

The State Bank of India (Successor to State Bank of Patiala), Patiala vs. DCIT, Circle, Patiala

ITA 1259/CHANDI/2017[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala Sr. Adv. a/wFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli, CIT DR
Section 36(1)(viia)

…atter of judicial propriety are bound to follow the view so expressed by the Hon‟ble High Courts in decisions cited supra. In this regard, it is also relevant to note the following observations of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in ACCE vs Dunlop India Ltd., [1985] 154 ITR 172 (SC): ―8. We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. vs. Broome (1972) AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in the hierarchical system of Courts" which exists in our country, "it is necessary for lower tier", including the High Court, "to accept loyally the decisions of the higher tiers". "It…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Guruvayoor Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 381/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Venkatraman IyerFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai
Section 143

…Hyd. Ltd [2016] 69 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi - Trib.) wherein the Hon'ble ITAT relied on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Smt Godavaridevi Saraf (113 ITR 589) and decision of Supreme Court in the case of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. (1985j 154 ITR 172 (sq. As per these decisions, even the decision of a nonjurisdictional High Court is binding on the Bench of Hon'ble ITAT. The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced below. "In the hierarchical judicial system that we have in our country, any bench of this Tribunal, whatever be it's numerical strength - a single member bench, a division be…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Guruvayoor Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 380/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Venkatraman IyerFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai
Section 143

…Hyd. Ltd [2016] 69 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi - Trib.) wherein the Hon'ble ITAT relied on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Smt Godavaridevi Saraf (113 ITR 589) and decision of Supreme Court in the case of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. (1985j 154 ITR 172 (sq. As per these decisions, even the decision of a nonjurisdictional High Court is binding on the Bench of Hon'ble ITAT. The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced below. "In the hierarchical judicial system that we have in our country, any bench of this Tribunal, whatever be it's numerical strength - a single member bench, a division be…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Guruvayoor Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1641/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Venkatraman IyerFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai
Section 143

…Hyd. Ltd [2016] 69 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi - Trib.) wherein the Hon'ble ITAT relied on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Smt Godavaridevi Saraf (113 ITR 589) and decision of Supreme Court in the case of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. (1985j 154 ITR 172 (sq. As per these decisions, even the decision of a nonjurisdictional High Court is binding on the Bench of Hon'ble ITAT. The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced below. "In the hierarchical judicial system that we have in our country, any bench of this Tribunal, whatever be it's numerical strength - a single member bench, a division be…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Guruvayoor Infrastructure Privat Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1640/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Venkatraman IyerFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai
Section 143

…Hyd. Ltd [2016] 69 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi - Trib.) wherein the Hon'ble ITAT relied on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Smt Godavaridevi Saraf (113 ITR 589) and decision of Supreme Court in the case of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. (1985j 154 ITR 172 (sq. As per these decisions, even the decision of a nonjurisdictional High Court is binding on the Bench of Hon'ble ITAT. The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced below. "In the hierarchical judicial system that we have in our country, any bench of this Tribunal, whatever be it's numerical strength - a single member bench, a division be…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Guruvayoor Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1639/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Venkatraman IyerFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai
Section 143

…Hyd. Ltd [2016] 69 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi - Trib.) wherein the Hon'ble ITAT relied on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Smt Godavaridevi Saraf (113 ITR 589) and decision of Supreme Court in the case of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. (1985j 154 ITR 172 (sq. As per these decisions, even the decision of a nonjurisdictional High Court is binding on the Bench of Hon'ble ITAT. The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced below. "In the hierarchical judicial system that we have in our country, any bench of this Tribunal, whatever be it's numerical strength - a single member bench, a division be…

Reliance Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2876/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 28

…nn.com 73 (Mum)], wherein, speaking through one of us (i.e. the Vice President), the coordinate bench has observed as follows: 7. ………. We may usefully take note of the observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Asstt. CCE v. Dunlop India Ltd. [1985] 154 ITR 172, wherein the Their Lordships quoted, with approval, from the decision of House of Lords to the effect that "We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome [1972] AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in the hierarchical system of courts" which exists in our country, "it is necessary for ea…

DCIT (Ltu)-2, Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2344/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 28

…nn.com 73 (Mum)], wherein, speaking through one of us (i.e. the Vice President), the coordinate bench has observed as follows: 7. ………. We may usefully take note of the observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Asstt. CCE v. Dunlop India Ltd. [1985] 154 ITR 172, wherein the Their Lordships quoted, with approval, from the decision of House of Lords to the effect that "We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome [1972] AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in the hierarchical system of courts" which exists in our country, "it is necessary for ea…

Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 1645/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 28

…nn.com 73 (Mum)], wherein, speaking through one of us (i.e. the Vice President), the coordinate bench has observed as follows: 7. ………. We may usefully take note of the observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Asstt. CCE v. Dunlop India Ltd. [1985] 154 ITR 172, wherein the Their Lordships quoted, with approval, from the decision of House of Lords to the effect that "We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome [1972] AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in the hierarchical system of courts" which exists in our country, "it is necessary for ea…

Barclays Bank Plc, Mumbai vs. CIT (International Taxation)-Range-1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 827/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 263Section 37

…Court, including the jurisdictional High Court, directly on the subject, then the decision of the High Court on the issue has to be followed by the ITAT. Reliance is placed on the following decisions for this contention. i) ACCE V/s. Dunlop India Ltd. (1995) 154 ITR 172 (SC). ii) CIT v/s. Godavaridevi Saraf (1979) 113 ITR 589 (Born) where it was held that until the contrary decision is given by any other competent High Court, which is binding on our Tribunal in the state of Bombay, it has to be proceed on the footing that the law declared by the High Court, though of another state, is the final law of land. iii)…

Siro Clinpharm P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO RG 3(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 847/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Assessment year: 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C(3)

…perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 7. While on this issue, we may usefully take note of the observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACCE v. Dunlop India Ltd. [(1985) 154 ITR 172 (SC)], wherein the Their Lordships quoted, with approval, from the decision of House of Lords to the effect that "We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome [1972] AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in the hierarchical system of courts" which exists in our country, "it is necessary…

M/S Qantas Airways Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT(TDS)Range-2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 4214/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2021AY 2012-13
Section 194Section 194CSection 201

…s on some frivolous grounds and their better reasoning. Such an approach cannot meet our judicial approval. We cannot help quoting from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. [(1985) 154 ITR 172 (SC)], where the Hon’ble Court has itself quoted from the decision of House of Lords as under: "We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome [1972] AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in the hierarchical system of courts" which exists in our country, "it is necessary for each lower tie…

Jyoti Harshad Mehta (Legal Heir of Late Harshad S. Mehta), Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT (C)- 2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1159/MUM/2020[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 1992-93
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 263Section 263(1)

…e is allowed to have the last word, and that last word once spoken is loyally accepted‖. The better wisdom of the court below must yield to the higher wisdom of the court above as held by the Supreme Court in the matter of Asst. CCE v. Dunlop India Ltd (1985) 154 ITR 172‖. 12 M/s. Jyoti Harshad Mehta, Legal Heir of Late Harshad S Mehta 2.10 It appears to be the impression/misunderstanding of some of the tax officials that the orders of ITAT interpreting the law cannot be binding as it is a fact finding authority. However, from the foregoing discussions, one can understand that that the decision of the higher au…

Kaybee P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 10(1)(3) (Erstwhile Juridictional ITO 8(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 4950/MUM/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2020AY 2006-07
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271ASection 271BSection 92ASection 92A(1)(b)Section 92A(2)Section 92DSection 92E

…of a division bench or even larger bench. We humbly bow to the wisdom of Hon‟ble Courts above. As we do so, we cannot help quoting from the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. [(1985) 154 ITR 172 (SC)], where the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has itself quoted from the decision of House of Lords as under: We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome [1972] AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in ITA No. 4949 and 4950/Mum/15 Assessment year: 2006-07 Page 15 of 17 the hierarchical system…

Kaybee P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 10(1)(3) (Erstwhile Juridictional ITO 8(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 4949/MUM/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2020AY 2006-07
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271ASection 271BSection 92ASection 92A(1)(b)Section 92A(2)Section 92DSection 92E

…of a division bench or even larger bench. We humbly bow to the wisdom of Hon‟ble Courts above. As we do so, we cannot help quoting from the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. [(1985) 154 ITR 172 (SC)], where the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has itself quoted from the decision of House of Lords as under: We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome [1972] AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in ITA No. 4949 and 4950/Mum/15 Assessment year: 2006-07 Page 15 of 17 the hierarchical system…

Kaybee P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 10(1)(3) (Erstwhile Juridictional ITO 8(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 2165/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2020AY 2007-08
Section 143(3)Section 92ASection 92A(1)Section 92A(1)(b)Section 92A(2)

…of a division bench or even larger bench. We humbly bow to the wisdom of Hon’ble Courts above. As we do so, we cannot help quoting from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. [(1985) 154 ITR 172 (SC)], where the Hon’ble Supreme Court has itself quoted from the decision of House of Lords as under: We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome [1972] AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in the hierarchical system of courts" which exists in our country, "it is necessary for each lo…

Kaybee P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 10(1)(3) (Erstwhile Juridictional ITO 8(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 2164/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2020AY 2006-07
Section 143(3)Section 92ASection 92A(1)Section 92A(1)(b)Section 92A(2)

…of a division bench or even larger bench. We humbly bow to the wisdom of Hon’ble Courts above. As we do so, we cannot help quoting from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. [(1985) 154 ITR 172 (SC)], where the Hon’ble Supreme Court has itself quoted from the decision of House of Lords as under: We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome [1972] AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in the hierarchical system of courts" which exists in our country, "it is necessary for each lo…

DCIT CC 7(1), Mumbai vs. Triumph Iternational Finance India Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 7090/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 & Assessment Year: 2012-2013 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Triumph International Tax, Central Cir. 7(1), Finance India Ltd., R. No. 653 6Th Flr., Oxford Centre 10, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Shroff Lane, Mumbai - 20 Colaba Causeway Colaba, Mumbai – 400005 Pan: Aaace0308A (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri P. Daniel/V. Jenardhanan (Drs) Assessee By : Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 27/01/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2020

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal (DR)For Respondent: Shri P. Daniel/V. Jenardhanan (DRs)
Section 143Section 57

…same, the CIT(A) ought to have followed the order of the Tribunal in as much as the Tribunal is a higher forum and for this purpose reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd, [1985] 154 ITR 172, which held that "the better wisdom of the Court below must yield to the higher wisdom of the Court above. Therefore, the decision of a High Court on a relevant issue must be followed in the absence of any contrary decision of any other High Court on the issue, because ignoring the decision of a High Court by a Tribunal would amount to demeaning…

Jayesh S Mehta vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, we do not find any merit in the

ITA/1/2010HC Karnataka08 Jan 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 158BSection 260

…hould be followed by the subordinate authorities. In support of his submissions, reliance has been placed on the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of ‘UOI Vs. KAMLAKSHI FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.’ AIR 1992 SC 711 AND ‘ACCE Vs. DUNLOP INDIA LTD.’ 154 ITR 172(SC). Lastly, it is urged that by consent the parties cannot confer jurisdiction and there is no prohibition for the appellate authorities to determine the 7 income less than the returned income. In support of aforesaid submissions, reference has been made to the decisions in the case of ‘BHANDARI METALS & ALLOYS LTD. Vs. STATE…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS) 1(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3785/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarita No. 3785/Mum/2016 For (Assessment Year 2012-13) M/S. Vodafone Idea Ltd. Ito (Tds)-1(2)(4), (Formerly Known As Idea 803, K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Cellular Ltd.), Skyline Icon, Vs. Hospital Building, 1St Floor, 86/92 Andheri Kurla Charni Road (W), Road, Marol Naka, Andheri Mumbai-400002. (E), Mumbai-400059. Pan: Aaacb2100P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi with Shri C.D. Joshi (AR)For Respondent: Shri S. Padmaja CIT-DR with Shri V.K. Agarwal ( Sr DR)
Section 133ASection 191Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)Section 254(1)

…archical judicial system, that we have in our country, lower tiers of judicial hierarchy has to respectfully follow the views expressed by the higher tiers of judicial hierarchy. In the case of Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd, (1985) 154 ITR 172 (SC), Supreme Court has observed, quoting the House of Lords, as follows; ITA No. 3785 Mum 2016-M/s. Vodafone Idea Ltd. 'We desire to add and as was said in Cassell & Co. Ltd. v. Broome (1972) AC 1027 (HL), we hope it will never be necessary for us to say so again that "in the hierarchical system of Courts" which exists in our country, "it is…