Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd.

111 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1978#1115 most cited

What is Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd. authority for?

An appellate authority can allow an assessee to raise an additional ground of appeal, even if not raised before the Assessing Officer, if the ground could not have been raised earlier or became available due to changed circumstances, provided there are good reasons for its delayed submission.

99

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Gurjargravures P. Ltd. · 111 ITR 1 · additional ground of appeal · appellate authority power · raising new claim · section 250 · section 251 · changed circumstances appeal · Jute Corporation of India · income tax appeal procedure

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 132Section 147Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 57(i)section 2(d)section 10basection 46section 46asection 158bb(1)retraction of statementsection 158bbminimum alternate taxsection 80a(5)section 158b(b)section 153a(1)(a)

Judgments citing Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd.

MOTIBHAI LALLUBHAI DESAI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 42(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5588/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nMs. Mona Solanki, CAFor Respondent: \nShri Pravin Salunkhe, (Sr. DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(a)Section 151

…ming deduction of purchase tax\nliability because the same had become liable to payment subsequent to\nthe assessment order. The Apex Court made reference to the decision of\nthe Apex Court in Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.\nGurjargravures P. Ltd. (111 ITR 1)and held that it does not prohibit\nthe raising of an additional ground before the appellate authority, when\nthe ground so raised could not have been raised before the Assessing\nOfficer or the ground now becomes available in view of changed\ncircumstances such as a decision of a Court allowing a particular\ndeduction.Since the grounds are purely…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 271/COCH/2021[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…nt subsequent to the assessment order. The Full Bench observed that the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. (supra) made reference to the decision of the Apex Court Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. in Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures (P.) Ltd. [1978] 111 ITR 1, and held that it does not prohibit the raising of an additional ground before the appellate authority, when the ground so raised could not have been raised before the Assessing Officer or the ground now becomes available in view of changed circumstances such as a decision of a Court allowing a particular deduction. 23. Therefore, before an additio…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 270/COCH/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…nt subsequent to the assessment order. The Full Bench observed that the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. (supra) made reference to the decision of the Apex Court Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. in Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures (P.) Ltd. [1978] 111 ITR 1, and held that it does not prohibit the raising of an additional ground before the appellate authority, when the ground so raised could not have been raised before the Assessing Officer or the ground now becomes available in view of changed circumstances such as a decision of a Court allowing a particular deduction. 23. Therefore, before an additio…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 269/COCH/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…nt subsequent to the assessment order. The Full Bench observed that the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. (supra) made reference to the decision of the Apex Court Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. in Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures (P.) Ltd. [1978] 111 ITR 1, and held that it does not prohibit the raising of an additional ground before the appellate authority, when the ground so raised could not have been raised before the Assessing Officer or the ground now becomes available in view of changed circumstances such as a decision of a Court allowing a particular deduction. 23. Therefore, before an additio…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 268/COCH/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…nt subsequent to the assessment order. The Full Bench observed that the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. (supra) made reference to the decision of the Apex Court Reena Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. in Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures (P.) Ltd. [1978] 111 ITR 1, and held that it does not prohibit the raising of an additional ground before the appellate authority, when the ground so raised could not have been raised before the Assessing Officer or the ground now becomes available in view of changed circumstances such as a decision of a Court allowing a particular deduction. 23. Therefore, before an additio…

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly

ITA 267/COCH/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

…because the same had become liable to payment subsequent to the assessment order. The Full Bench observed that the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. (supra) made reference to the decision of the Apex Court in Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures (P.) Ltd. [1978] 111 ITR 1, and held that it does not prohibit the raising of an additional ground before the appellate authority, when the ground so raised could not have been raised before the Assessing Officer or the ground now becomes available in view of changed circumstances such as a decision of a Court allowing a particular deduction. 23. Therefore, before an additio…

GANGUNAIDU SABBAVARAPU,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), VISAKHPATNAM

ITA 177/VIZ/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025AY 2023-24
Section 10(37)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(37)Section 250Section 254Section 96

…se is another matter. The exercise of discretion is entirely different from the existence of jurisdiction. 12. At page 694, after referring to certain observations of the Supreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd., (1978) 111 ITR 1, the Supreme Court observed at Page 694 as under :- "The above observations do not rule out a case for raising an additional ground before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner if the ground so raised could not have been raised at that particular stage when the return was filed or when the assessment order was made, or that the ground became availab…

SHIVALIK PRINTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE-8, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessees’ appeals in ITA nos

ITA 8136/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80J

…he return of income as well as during the course assessment proceedings. While rejecting the claim, Ld. CIT(A) referred the decisions in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1990)187 ITR 688 (SC) and Add, CIT v. Gurjargravures Pvt. LTD, [1978] 111 ITR 1 (SC). SUBMISSIONS 2. Regarding justification of raising new claim during appellate proceedings and the powers of the Appellate authorities to entertain and decide the same, the Appellant submits as under: [A] No tax to be levied except by authority of law and only correct income to be taxed - Department not to take advantage of ignorance of an Asse…

M/S. SHIVALIK PRINTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessees’ appeals in ITA nos

ITA 2296/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80J

…he return of income as well as during the course assessment proceedings. While rejecting the claim, Ld. CIT(A) referred the decisions in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1990)187 ITR 688 (SC) and Add, CIT v. Gurjargravures Pvt. LTD, [1978] 111 ITR 1 (SC). SUBMISSIONS 2. Regarding justification of raising new claim during appellate proceedings and the powers of the Appellate authorities to entertain and decide the same, the Appellant submits as under: [A] No tax to be levied except by authority of law and only correct income to be taxed - Department not to take advantage of ignorance of an Asse…

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…ent stood abated as a consequence of the search. Also, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (supro) after considering the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures (P.) Ltd., 111 ITR 1, Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT 187 ITR 688, National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT 229 ITR 383 and Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT (supra) has upheld the powers of the appellate authorities including Ld. CIT(A) to entertain and adjudicate additional claims which was not made by an assessee in the return of income. 14.11 We further note that, on simil…

ECONOMIC EXPLOSIVES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (2), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…ent stood abated as a consequence of the search. Also, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (supro) after considering the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Addl. CIT v. Gurjargravures (P.) Ltd., 111 ITR 1, Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT 187 ITR 688, National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT 229 ITR 383 and Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT (supra) has upheld the powers of the appellate authorities including Ld. CIT(A) to entertain and adjudicate additional claims which was not made by an assessee in the return of income. 14.11 We further note that, on simil…

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 987/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e is another matter. The exercise of discretion is entirely different from the existence of jurisdiction. 16. At page 694, after referring to certain observations of the Supreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd., (1978) 111 ITR 1, the Supreme Court observed at Page 694 as under :- ITA No.838 to 843/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Paul Plathotathil John ITA Nos.845 to 847/Bang/2023 M/s. John Developers, Bangalore , ITA Nos.961, 962, 982 to 987 & 1012/Bang/2023 M/s. John Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 73 of 147 The above observations do…

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

ITA 986/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sri T.M. Shivakumar

…s another matter. The exercise of\ndiscretion is entirely different from the existence of jurisdiction.\n16. At page 694, after referring to certain observations of the\nSupreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v.\nGurjargravures P. Ltd., (1978) 111 ITR 1, the Supreme Court\nobserved at Page 694 as under :-\nPage 72 of 147\nThe above observations do not rule out a case for raising an\nadditional ground before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner\nif the ground so raised could not have been raised at that\nparticular stage when the return was filed or when the\nassessment order was made, or that the…

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

ITA 983/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

…s another matter. The exercise of\ndiscretion is entirely different from the existence of jurisdiction.\n16. At page 694, after referring to certain observations of the\nSupreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v.\nGurjargravures P. Ltd., (1978) 111 ITR 1, the Supreme Court\nobserved at Page 694 as under :-\nPage 73 of 147\nThe above observations do not rule out a case for raising an\nadditional ground before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner\nif the ground so raised could not have been raised at that\nparticular stage when the return was filed or when the\nassessment order was made, or that the…

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 847/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e is another matter. The exercise of discretion is entirely different from the existence of jurisdiction. 16. At page 694, after referring to certain observations of the Supreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd., (1978) 111 ITR 1, the Supreme Court observed at Page 694 as under :- ITA No.838 to 843/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Paul Plathotathil John ITA Nos.845 to 847/Bang/2023 M/s. John Developers, Bangalore , ITA Nos.961, 962, 982 to 987 & 1012/Bang/2023 M/s. John Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 73 of 147 The above observations do…

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

ITA 846/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

…se is another matter. The exercise of discretion is entirely different from the existence of jurisdiction. 16. At page 694, after referring to certain observations of the Supreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd., (1978) 111 ITR 1, the Supreme Court observed at Page 694 as under :-ITA No.838 to 843/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore ITA No.844/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Plathotathil John ITA Nos.845 to 847/Bang/2023 M/s. John Developers, Bangalore , ITA Nos.961, 962, 982 to 987 & 1012/Bang/2023 M/s. John Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 73 of 147 The ab…

JOHN DEVELOPERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 845/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e is another matter. The exercise of discretion is entirely different from the existence of jurisdiction. 16. At page 694, after referring to certain observations of the Supreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd., (1978) 111 ITR 1, the Supreme Court observed at Page 694 as under :- ITA No.838 to 843/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Paul Plathotathil John ITA Nos.845 to 847/Bang/2023 M/s. John Developers, Bangalore , ITA Nos.961, 962, 982 to 987 & 1012/Bang/2023 M/s. John Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 73 of 147 The above observations do…

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 841/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e is another matter. The exercise of discretion is entirely different from the existence of jurisdiction. 16. At page 694, after referring to certain observations of the Supreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd., (1978) 111 ITR 1, the Supreme Court observed at Page 694 as under :- ITA No.838 to 843/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Paul Plathotathil John ITA Nos.845 to 847/Bang/2023 M/s. John Developers, Bangalore , ITA Nos.961, 962, 982 to 987 & 1012/Bang/2023 M/s. John Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 73 of 147 The above observations do…

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 840/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e is another matter. The exercise of discretion is entirely different from the existence of jurisdiction. 16. At page 694, after referring to certain observations of the Supreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd., (1978) 111 ITR 1, the Supreme Court observed at Page 694 as under :- ITA No.838 to 843/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Paul Plathotathil John ITA Nos.845 to 847/Bang/2023 M/s. John Developers, Bangalore , ITA Nos.961, 962, 982 to 987 & 1012/Bang/2023 M/s. John Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 73 of 147 The above observations do…

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 839/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…e is another matter. The exercise of discretion is entirely different from the existence of jurisdiction. 16. At page 694, after referring to certain observations of the Supreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd., (1978) 111 ITR 1, the Supreme Court observed at Page 694 as under :- ITA No.838 to 843/Bang/2023 M/s. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Paul Plathotathil John ITA Nos.845 to 847/Bang/2023 M/s. John Developers, Bangalore , ITA Nos.961, 962, 982 to 987 & 1012/Bang/2023 M/s. John Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 73 of 147 The above observations do…

Showing 1–20 of 99 · Page 1 of 5

Additional Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gurjargravures P. Ltd. (111 ITR 1) — Cited in 99 Judgments | BharatTax