Bank of Chettinad Ltd. v. CIT

8 ITR 522Reported decision1940#4719 most cited

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

An action that is legally valid cannot be disregarded simply due to a perceived underlying motive or economic detriment. The law focuses on the legality of the action itself, not the intention behind it.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Bank of Chettinad Ltd. v. CIT · 8 ITR 522 · valid action · underlying motive · economic detriment · substance over form · letters of law · spirit of law

Judgments citing Bank of Chettinad Ltd. v. CIT

Ritu Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1481/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

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…

Mentor Graphics Ireland Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6693/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 144C(1)Section 9(1)(vi)Section 90

…hief of Explanation (2) to clause (vi) of sub-section (1) of section 9 and is liable to tax. Therefore, there is no substance in the said contention.” Similar view was also upheld by jurisdictional Delhi Tribunal in the case of Microsoft Corporation vs. ADIT (8 ITR 522) wherein the payments for software were held to be taxable as royalty both under the Act and the DTAA and the Authority for Advance Rulings in the rulings pronounced in the cases of Millennium IT Software Ltd. (338 ITR 391) and Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Pty Ltd. have held the payments for software taxable as ‘royalty’ in India. 7 Assessment year…

I.T.O WD - 8(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Ruia Sons Pvt Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 365/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 I.T.O., Ward-8(3), -Vs.- M/S. Ruia Sons Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaccr 3949 Q] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, Cit For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, CITFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 301Section 40

…ITR 148 made a distinction between tax avoidance and tax planning. it was held:- "having anxiously scanned MacDowell' s case, we find no reference therein to having dissented from or overruled the decision of the Privy Council in the Bank of Chettinands case 8 ITR 522 (PC). In any the principles appears to have been reiterated with approval by the Constitution Bench of this court in Mathuram's case 8 SCC 667 para 6 7 M/s.Ruia Sons Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr.2009-10 12. We are, therefore unable to accept the contention of the respondent that there has been fl very drastic change in the final jurisprudence in India, as would…

I.T.O WD - 7(3), Kolkata. vs. M/S Shalini Properties & Developers Private Limited., Kolkata

In the result the appeal preferred by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 171/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm] I.T.A No. 171/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 I.T.O., Ward-7(3) -Vs.- M/S. Shalini Properties & Developers Kolkata Pvt. Limited., Kolkata [Pan : Aahcs 7896 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, Cit For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, CITFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 301Section 37(1)

…ITR 148 made a distinction between tax avoidance and tax planning it was held :- “ having anxiously scanned MacDowerll’s case, we find no reference therein to having dissented from or overruled the decision of the Privy Council in the Bank of Chettinand case 8 ITR 522 (PC). In any of the principles appears to have been reiterated with approval by the Constitution Bench of this court in Mathuram’s case 8 SCC 667 para 12. We are therefore unable to accept the contention of the respondent that there has been a very drastic change in the final jurisprudence in India, as would entail a departure. In our judgment from…

Bhavya Construction Co., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 21(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4389/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, बी, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member ITA Nos.4389 & 4390/Mum/2014 Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 M/s. Bhavya Construction ACIT, Circle-21(1), Co., 4, Bhide Bungalow, बनाम/ 6th Floor, Pratyaksha Kar 37-A, M.G. Road, Vile Bhavan, BKC, Bandra- Vs. Parle-East, Mumbai – 57. East, Mumbai – 51. (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. AAAFB 1375 K राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri O.P…