Bank of Chettinad Ltd. v. CIT

8 ITR 522Reported decision1940#4793 most cited

What is Bank of Chettinad Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

An act that is legally valid cannot be considered void or non-existent solely because of an alleged underlying motive that results in economic detriment or prejudice to national interests.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Bank of Chettinad Ltd. v. CIT · valid act · non est · motive · economic detriment · national interests · UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan

Judgments citing Bank of Chettinad Ltd. v. CIT

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. VINOD BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 66/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. PRAMOD KUMAR BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 65/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. SHEETAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 64/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. MADAN LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 63/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. RAVI BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 62/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. VINAY BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 61/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. VISHAL BAMALWA , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 60/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. BHAGWATI DEVII BAMALWA , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 59/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. MEENAKSHI BAMALWA SONI, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 58/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. USHA BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 57/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. HANS RAJ BAMALWA (HUF), DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 56/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. HANS RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 55/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BACHH RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 54/GTY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BACHH RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 53/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BAJRANG LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 52/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BAJRANG LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 51/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…l and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. AzadiBachaoAndolan, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster’s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad’s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram’s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell’s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD vs. ARUNA GULLAPALLI, HYDERABAD

ITA 339/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Aruna Gullapalli, (International Taxation) – 1, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan No.Bfhpg9489L. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue By: Shri Kumar Adithya Date Of Hearing: 23.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.01.2023

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Adithya
Section 144Section 250(4)Section 48Section 54FSection 69

…the “ substance of the matter” may be regarded as distinguished from the form or the strict legal position, was given its quietus by the House of lords in duke of Westminister vs. IR 19 TC 490, 520, 524,. by the privy council in Bank of Chettinad Ltd vs. CIT, 8 ITR 522, 526 and by the Supreme Court in C1T vs. Keshavlal Patel, 66, ITR 692, 699-700. 12.9 Thus, in view of the above factual footing and principle of law, the ground of appeal No.2 raised by the appellant is allowed and the AO is directed to allow the claim of deduction u/s 54F of the I.T.Act, 1961. There is a minor mismatch in the amounts and cheque nu…

DABUR INVEST CORP,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-46, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8058/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Partially Through Video Conferencing) Dabur Invest Corp, The Joint Commissioner Of Vs. 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax , Rouse Avenue, New Delhi Range-46, Pan: Aaadfd2529G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143Section 4

…option money cannot be considered as interest because it is paid annually. The payment of option money annually may be convenient to CUIH. However, it is settled proposition of law as held by the Privy Council in the case of Bank of Chettinad Ltd. vs. CIT in 8 ITR 522, as referred by the Supreme Court in the case of Motors & General Stores (supra) that if action seeking to recover the tax cannot bring the subject within the letters of law, the subject is free, however apparently within the spirit of the law the case might otherwise appears to be. Hence, the very inference of the Pr. CIT that option money receive…

THE DY. DIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. FRIENDS OF WWB INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assesseee both are dismissed

ITA 1608/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…te which will serve the spirit and intention of the Legislature.” I.T.A No. 1608/Ahd/2017 & CO No. 49/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No 8 DCIT(E) vs. Friends of WWB India The Constitution Bench reiterated the observations in Bank of Chettinad Ltd. v. CIT [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC), quoting with approval the observations of Lord Russell of Killowen in IRC v. Duke of Westminster [1936] AC 1 (HL); [1936] 19 TC 490 and the observations of Lord Simonds in Russell v. Scott [1948] 2 All ER15. It thus appears to us that not only is the principle in Duke of Westminster's case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 alive and kicking in Eng…

UMA SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRL CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI

ITA 1484/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…and Co. Ltd. V. Commercial Tax Officer [1985] 154 ITR 148. In the said case of UOI Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan, the Hon‘ble Supreme Court observed as under: “In our judgment, from Westminster‟s case [1936] AC 1 (HL) ; 19 TC 490 to Bank of Chettinad‟s case [1940] 8 ITR 522 (PC) to Mathuram‟s case [1999] 8 SCC 667, despite the hiccups of McDowell‟s case [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), the law has remained the same. We are unable to agree with the submission that an act which is otherwise valid in law can be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or pre…

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2