Ahmedabad Mfg. and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. v. S.G. Mehta, ITO

48 ITR 154Supreme Court of India1963#14236 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 331,145 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 285BASection 68Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 155section 115bbsection 115bsection 115bbesection 115income from other sourcessection 11section 69asection 153section 69section 15section 68

Judgments citing Ahmedabad Mfg. and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. v. S.G. Mehta, ITO

Nilesh Popatlal Gada, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(4), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 1538/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 250Section 68

…date earlier than the date of commencement and affect rights which, but for such operation, would have continued undisturbed. This view has been held by Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Ahmedabad Mfg. and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. v. S.G. Mehta, ITO [1963] 48 ITR 154. 15 10.3 Even Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Bhagavathy Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala[1990] 50 Taxman 180/[1989] 179 ITR 508 (Ker.) held that the rate or rates prescribed by a Finance Act is or, subsequently, changed by passing a finance (amendment) Act having retrospective effect from the date from which the original Finance Act w…

Mohan Lal Ashok Kumar Saraf, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 879/JPR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Nov 2024AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri Ankit Totuka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

…a date earlier than the date of commencement and affect rights which, but for such operation, would have continued undisturbed. This view has been held by Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Ahmedabad Mfg.and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. v. SG. Mehta, ITO (1963) 48 ITR 154 10.3 Even Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Bhagavathy Tea Estates Ltd. v State of Kerala 1990) 50 Taxman 180[1989] 179 ITR 508 (Ker) held that the rate or rates prescribed by a Finance Act is or subsequently, changed by passing a finance (amendment) Act having retrospective effect from the date from which the original Finance Act was passe…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(3)(2), Bangalore vs. Ssg Lakshmipura Housing Development-2, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 803/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 115BSection 143(3)

…date earlier than the date of commencement and affect rights which, but for such operation, would have continued undisturbed. This view has been held by Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Ahmedabad Mfg. and Calico Printing co. Ltd v. S.G. Mehta, ITO [19631 48 ITR 154. 5.1 In view of the said clearcut finding given by the Chennai Bench of Tribunal, we are also agreeing with the view expressed in the above order and hold that the amendment made by the Taxation laws (Second Amendment) Act, 2016 would come into effect from the AY 2017-18 and not from the AY 2018-19. In view of the above said reasoning, the order o…

Smt. Rajni Gutpa, Alwar vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar

ITA 45/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 153ASection 68

…date earlier than the date of commencement and affect rights which, but for such operation, would have continued undisturbed. This view has been held by Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Ahmedabad Mfg. and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. v. S.G. Mehta, ITO (1963) 48 ITR 154. 10.3 Even Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Bhagavathy Tea Estates Lid. v. State of Kerala[1990] 50 Taxman 180//1989] 179 ITR 508 (Ker.) held that the rate or rates prescribed by a Finance Act is or, subsequently, changed by passing a finance (amendment) Act having retrospective effect from the date from which the original Finance Act was…

Zydus Lifesciences Limited (Formerly Known As Cadila Healthcare Ltd.), Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 162/AHD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 162/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 92BSection 92C

…ct. Therefore, the TP order issued after the expiry of the aforesaid period is invalid and unforeseeable in the eye of law. This principle has been upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co Lid v SG Mehta [1963) 48 ITR 154 (SC). 10.1.12. Further, the Assessee would like to place its reliance on the recent Hon'ble Madras High Court's judgment in case of writ petition filed by M/S. Pfizer Healthcare India Pvt Ltd (WP/32699/2019). 10.1.13. In the given Writ Petition, the Petitioner had challenged the order of the Transfer Pricing Order dated 1 November 2019 as the same…

Karthick Natarajan, Madurai vs. DCIT, Intnl Taxn Circle, Madurai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly- allowed

ITA 382/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(1)(vii)Section 69Section 69A

…rlier than the date of commencement and affect rights which, but for such operation, would have continued undisturbed. This view has been held by Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Ahmadabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. Vs. SG Mehta ITO [1963] 48 ITR 154 (SC). 13 10.3 Even Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Cf. Bhagavathy Tea Estates Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala [1989] 179 ITR 508 (Ker.) held that the rate or rates prescribed by a Finance Act is or, subsequently, changed by passing a finance (amendment) Act having retrospective effect from the date from which the original Finance Act was passed…

M/S Hcl Technologies Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT (TDS), Noida

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1723/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihcl Technologies Ltd, Acit(Tds), Plot No. 3A, Tower 6, 14Th Floor, Vs. Noida Sector-126, Noida Pan: Aaach1645P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI ] (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HCL Technologies Ltd, ACIT(TDS), Plot No. 3A, Tower 6, 14th Floor, Vs. Noida Sector-126, Noida PAN: AAACH1645P (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Assessee by : Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv., Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv., & Shri Arpit Goyal, C.A. Department by : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR, Date of Hearing 15/07/2020 Date of pronouncement 20/07/2020 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. : 1. This appeal is filed by the by the assessee…