Allied Motors (P) Ltd. v. CIT

224 ITR 677Supreme Court of India1997#182 most cited

What is Allied Motors (P) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Amendments to the Income-tax Act that are curative, clarificatory, or beneficial in nature apply retrospectively from the date the original statutory provision was introduced, even if not explicitly stated.

398

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Allied Motors (P) Ltd. v. CIT · retrospective application · curative amendment · clarificatory amendment · beneficial amendment · Section 43B · Section 50C · Section 194N · date of introduction · statutory interpretation

Also reported as

3 SCC 47291 Taxmann 205

Sections most often in play

Section 40(a)(ia)Section 43BSection 143(3)Section 194CSection 195Section 50CSection 147Section 250
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 43(b)section 3(b)section 36(va)section 43b(b)section 34(1)(iv)actual payment basissection 34(1)section 2(c)section 36(1)(iv)section 36(l)section 40a(2)section 2(24)(x)

Judgments citing Allied Motors (P) Ltd. v. CIT

The Erode District Central Co-Op.Bank Ltd., Erode vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Erode

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

ITA 3025/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3025/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Erode District Central Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Income Tax, 1, Bhavani Main Road, Circle 1, Karungalpalayam S.O., Erode 638 003. Erode. [Pan:Aaaat7251P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Krishna Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.05.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.10.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Raised 5 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer In Making

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Shri P. Krishna Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 43D

…able to be treated as retrospective in nature. Further, he drew our attention to said para and submits that the Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh, taking support from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. v. CIT 224 ITR 677 (SC), affirmed the order of the ITAT Chandigarh Benches. The ld. AR also submits that there is no decision in this regard by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court prayed to follow the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh. 6. The ld. DR Shri P. Krishna Kumar, JCIT relied on the provisions of section 43D of the Act. 4 I.T.A. No.3025…

M/S Coal India Ltd vs. Commr.of Customs(Port) Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

C.A. No.-008028-008028 - 2010Supreme Court01 May 2025

Bench: The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata (‘Cestat’ For Short Digitally Signed By Ashish Kondle Date: 2025.05.01 11:42:33 Ist Reason: Signature Not Verified

Section 130E

…td., Surat1 2. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar2 3. Commissioner of Customs (Ports), Kolkata Vs. J.K. Corpn. Ltd.3 4. Commissioner of Customs Vs. Ferodo India (P) Ltd.4 1 (1997) 9 SCC 738 2 (2000) 3 SCC 472 3 (2007) 9 SCC 401 12 15.4. Learned counsel for the appellant therefore submits that view taken by CESTAT cannot be sustained. Therefore, orders of the Assistant Commissioner dated 03.03.2004, Commissioner (Appeals) dated 29.06.2004 and the impugned order of CESTAT dated 20.04.2010 are liable to be set aside. 16. Per contra, lea…

Ambarnuj Finance & Investments Pvt Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-26, Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4127/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sudhir Pareeka.Yr. : 2018-19 Ambarnuj Finance & Investments Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-26, Ltd, New Delhi Shop 243, North Ex Mall, Sector-9, Rohini, Delhi – 85 (Pan: Aaaca5799F) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Sh. Javed Akhtar, CIT(DR)
Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.YR. : 2018-19 Ambarnuj Finance & Investments Pvt. VS. DCIT, Central Circle-26, Ltd, New Delhi Shop 243, North Ex Mall, Sector-9, Rohini, Delhi – 85 (PAN: AAACA5799F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) : Ms. Shilpi Jain, CA Appellant by Respondent by : Sh. Javed Akhtar, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 01.04.2025 Date of pronouncement : 09.04.2025 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM : The assessee filed the present appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-29, New Delhi dated 14.8.…

Grasim Industries Ltd ( Corporate Finance Division), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

ITA 3762/MUM/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee vide order, dated 18/05/2009. 4. Not being satisfied with the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A), the Assessee has preferred appeal before this Tribunal. The Revenue has also filed cross-appeal challenging the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A).

For Appellant: Shri J. D. Mistry Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kishor Dhule
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 43B

…8 of the above judgment in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court had referred to another judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Allied Motors’ [Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [(1997) 224 ITR 677 (SC)]. In that case the the Hon’ble Supreme Court had, while holding that the First Proviso to Section 43B of the Act shall have retrospective operation, observed as under: “4. To understand the circumstances in which section 43B came to be inserted in the Act and the mischief which it sought to prevent, it is necessary to look at the memorandum…

Anshul Anil Goel, Pune vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (1) 1, Pune

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

ITA 2537/PUN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2024-25

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(1)Section 206CSection 64

…ium Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors. 1975 AIR 2279 b) Pinnacle Vastunirman Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India (2021) 438 ITR 27 (Bom) 12. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Allied Motors (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 677 (SC), he submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that a proviso which is inserted to remedy unintended consequences and to made the provision workable, a proviso which supplies an obvious omission in the section and is required to be read into the section to give the section a reasonable interpretation, requires to…

M/S Varsha Construction, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5/RPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 5/Rpr/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Varsha Construction, V The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Second Floor-25, 26, Millenium Plaza, S Tax, Circle-1(1), Central Revenue Raipur-492 001, Chhattisgarh Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G.. Pan: Aaefv 8399 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""थ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2025 : 22.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी रिवश सूद, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़िपया, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No: 5/RPR/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/s Varsha Construction, V The Assistant Commissioner of Income Second Floor-25, 26, Millenium Plaza, s Tax, Circle-1(1), Central Revenue Raipur-492 001, Chhattisgarh Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G.. PAN: AAEFV 8399 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""थ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by : Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, CA राज…

Shree Shivam Attires Pvt. Ltd., Durg vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Bhilai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed, in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 111/RPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 111/Rpr/2021 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Yash Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी रिवश सूद, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़िपया, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No: 111/RPR/2021 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shree Shivam Attires Pvt. Ltd., v Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Shree Shivam Shopping Mall, s Circle-2(1), 32/32, Bunglows, Amdi Station Road, Santrabadi, Durg, Nagar, HUDCO, Bhilai, C.G. C.G.- 491001 PAN: AANCS9084N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""थ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Yash Jain, CA राज" की…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD)-I/C DCIT Circle 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Tata Aig General Insurance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1835/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 10(15)(iv)Section 101A(7)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43BSection 44

…to be construed as clarificatory having retrospective effect as it was brought in to avoid unintended consequences and discrimination with other assessees. It placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT, 224 ITR 677, while giving its direction so as to make the computation provisions mentioned in Rule 5 of the First Schedule of the Act, workable. Relevant extracts from the said order are reproduced for ease of reference. “4.1. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee had debited depreciation in its…

DCIT, Cir-8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Tata Aig General Insurance Co. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1834/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 10(15)(iv)Section 101A(7)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43BSection 44

…to be construed as clarificatory having retrospective effect as it was brought in to avoid unintended consequences and discrimination with other assessees. It placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT, 224 ITR 677, while giving its direction so as to make the computation provisions mentioned in Rule 5 of the First Schedule of the Act, workable. Relevant extracts from the said order are reproduced for ease of reference. “4.1. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee had debited depreciation in its…

M/S Tata Aig General Insurance Co.Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 8(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1816/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2017-18
Section 10(15)(iv)Section 101A(7)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43BSection 44

…to be construed as clarificatory having retrospective effect as it was brought in to avoid unintended consequences and discrimination with other assessees. It placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT, 224 ITR 677, while giving its direction so as to make the computation provisions mentioned in Rule 5 of the First Schedule of the Act, workable. Relevant extracts from the said order are reproduced for ease of reference. “4.1. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee had debited depreciation in its…

M/S Tata Aig General Insurance Co.Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 8(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1815/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 10(15)(iv)Section 101A(7)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43BSection 44

…to be construed as clarificatory having retrospective effect as it was brought in to avoid unintended consequences and discrimination with other assessees. It placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT, 224 ITR 677, while giving its direction so as to make the computation provisions mentioned in Rule 5 of the First Schedule of the Act, workable. Relevant extracts from the said order are reproduced for ease of reference. “4.1. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee had debited depreciation in its…

Ayub Abdul Khandar Tamatgar, Dharwad vs. JCIT, Hubli

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 854/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Years : 2010-11

For Appellant: N.G Rasalkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT (DR)
Section 40A(3)

…on’ble Courts have taken view that an amendment brought in statute which curative in nature shall be operative from retrospective effect. In this regard, we also refer the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Allied Motors (P.) Ltd vs. CIT reported in 224 ITR 677, where it was held as under: 11. This view has been accepted by a number of High Courts. In the case of CIT v. Chandulal Venichand [1994] 209 ITR 7/ 73 Taxman 349 , the Gujarat High Court has held that the first proviso to section 43B is retrospective and sales-tax for the last quarter paid before the filing of the return for the assessment year…

T and T Infra Limited, Pune vs. Asst.Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-7, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 291/PUN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 T & T Infra Limited Acit, Circle – 7, Pune A-1, Vishnu Vihar, Bibwewadi Vs. Kondhwa Road, Market Yard, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aaect3902H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tarun Ghia Department By : S/Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Sourabh Nayak Date Of Hearing : 10-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 01-10-2024 O R D E R Per Astha Chandra, Jm :

For Appellant: Shri Tarun GhiaFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari and Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(2)Section 80I

…cility which fulfills certain conditions. Those conditions are : (i) Ownership of the enterprise by a Company registered in India or by a consortium; (ii) An agreement with the Central or State Government, local authority or statutory body; and (iii) 2 (1997) 224 ITR 677 (S.C.) 3 (2009) 319 ITR 306 (S.C.) The start of operation and maintenance of the infrastructure facility on or after 1st April 1995. The requirement that the operation and maintenance of the infrastructure facility should commence after 1st April 1995 has to be harmoniously construed with the main provision under which a deduction is available to…

Pee Kay Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 7(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 851/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Akkal Dudhwewala, ARFor Respondent: S.B. Chakraborthy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Pee Kay Vanijya Private Limited, DCIT, Circle-7(1), Kolkata, 7C, Kiran Shankar Roy Road, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Hasting Chambers, 4th Floor, Vs Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700001 Kolkata - 700069 (PAN: AABCP6488P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Akkal Dudhwewala, AR Respondent by : S.B. Chakraborthy, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 09.09.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMB…

Shri.Veeron Vincent, Thrissur vs. The DCIT, Cen-Circle, Thrissur

ITA 257/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…14-2015 only. Faced with this situation, learned counsel’s case is that since the legislature has inserted the said proviso as a curative method only; and therefore, it indeed carries retrospective effect in light of Allied Motors (P.) Ltd., vs. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 677 (SC); CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd., [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC); CIT vs. VatikaTownship (P.)Ltd., [2014] 367 ITR 466 (SC). We see no merit in assessee’s instant legal argument as per Shree Chowdhary Transport Co. vs. ITO [2020] 426 ITR 289 (SC) having rejected the very argument in the concerned assessee’s case. That being the legal preposition s…

Shri.Veeron Vincent, Thrissur vs. The DCIT, Cen-Circle, Thrissur

ITA 256/COCH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…14-2015 only. Faced with this situation, learned counsel’s case is that since the legislature has inserted the said proviso as a curative method only; and therefore, it indeed carries retrospective effect in light of Allied Motors (P.) Ltd., vs. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 677 (SC); CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd., [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC); CIT vs. VatikaTownship (P.)Ltd., [2014] 367 ITR 466 (SC). We see no merit in assessee’s instant legal argument as per Shree Chowdhary Transport Co. vs. ITO [2020] 426 ITR 289 (SC) having rejected the very argument in the concerned assessee’s case. That being the legal preposition s…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. M/S. Suflam Infra Project Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 46/NAG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya, CTI DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA No.97/Nag./2019 (Assessment Year : 2014-15) Sufalam Infra Project Ltd 125, Abhyankar Road, Sitabuldi, Nagpur ……………. Appellant PAN – AAQCS2011N v/s Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent (Central) Nagpur Assessee by : Shri Kapil Hirani, Adv & Shri Mukesh Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya, CTI DR AND ITA No.46/Nag./2021 (Assessment Year : 2014-15) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Central Circle 1(1), Nagpur v/s Sufalam Infra Proj…

Sufalam Infra Projects Ltd, Nagpur vs. Pr. CIT (Central ), Nagpur

In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 97/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya, CTI DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA No.97/Nag./2019 (Assessment Year : 2014-15) Sufalam Infra Project Ltd 125, Abhyankar Road, Sitabuldi, Nagpur ……………. Appellant PAN – AAQCS2011N v/s Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent (Central) Nagpur Assessee by : Shri Kapil Hirani, Adv & Shri Mukesh Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya, CTI DR AND ITA No.46/Nag./2021 (Assessment Year : 2014-15) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Central Circle 1(1), Nagpur v/s Sufalam Infra Proj…

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Meelendra Deependra Singh, Mumbai

In the result, ITA No.4430/Mum/2023 is dismissed

ITA 4430/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm Income Tax Officer Room No.116, 1St Floor, Meelendra Deependra Singh, G-Block, 503, Pushpakunj, A Road, Kautilya Bhavan, Churchgate, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Bfaps5402N Assessee By : Shri H.N. Motiwalla, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Meshram, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.05.2024

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Motiwalla, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Meshram, DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

…was being made to remove undue hardship to the assessee or held to be retrospective. 12. The Honble Supreme Court in Kolkata Export Company took note of the earlier decisions on the same issue in the case of Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 91 Taxman 205/224 ITR 677, Whirlpool of India Ltd. v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 3, CIT v. Amrit Banaspati Co. Ltd. [2002] 123 Taxman 74/255 ITR 117 (SC) and CIT v. Alom Enterprises [2009] 185 Taxman 416/319 ITR 306 and held that the new proviso should be given retrospective effect from the insertion on the ground that the proviso was added to remedy unintended consequences and s…

Sakshi Fincap Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-22(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8389/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Aman Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardan, Sr. DR
Section 254Section 56(2)(viib)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. C. N. Prasad, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 8389/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Sakshi Fincap Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, U-7, Green Park Extension, Ward-22(2), New Delhi-110016 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCS2800G Assessee by : Sh. Aman Garg, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Vardan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 01.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 16.04.2024 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-XXV, Ne…