Builders’ Association Of India v. Union Of India

2 SCC 645Reported decision1989#943 most cited
113

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2001 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Builders’ Association Of India v. Union Of India · 2 SCC 645 1989 · Income Tax Act 1961 · Section 132 search and seizure · block assessment sections 158 · 158B · 158BE · assessment after search sections 153A · 153B · Section 142(2A) · 143(3) assessment procedure · Section 90 · 90A DTAA · audi alteram partem natural justice · extension of limitation period · Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 142(2A)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 90Section 90ASection 132 of the Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 158besection 153(3)section 90aaudi alteram partemextension of limitationsection 142(2a)section 153bsection 90principal commissioner of income-taxsection 158bsection 158section 12

Judgments citing Builders’ Association Of India v. Union Of India

CIT -15(2), New Delhi vs. Logix Buildestate Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1380/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 1Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 250

…by the new provision (see Principles of Statutory Interpretation, ibid., p. 565). If any authority is needed in support of the proposition, it is to be found in West U.P. Sugar Mills Assn. v. State of U.P. [West U.P. Sugar Mills Assn.v. State of U.P., (2002) 2 SCC 645], State of Rajasthan v. Mangilal Pindwal [State of Rajasthan v. Mangilal Pindwal, (1996) 5 SCC 60], Koteswar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga& Co. [Koteswar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga& Co., (1969) 1 SCC 255] and A.L.V.R.S.T. Veerappa Chettiar v. I.S. Michael [A.L.V.R.S.T. Veerappa Chettiar v. I.S. Michael, 1962 SCC OnLine SC 318 : 1963…

M/S. Malhotra Cables Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA

ITA 4712/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 153BSection 90

…by the new provision (see Principles of Statutory Interpretation, ibid., p. 565). If any authority is needed in support of the proposition, it is to be found in West U.P. Sugar Mills Assn. v. State of U.P. [West U.P. Sugar Mills Assn.v. State of U.P., (2002) 2 SCC 645], State of Rajasthan v. Mangilal Pindwal [State of Rajasthan v. Mangilal Pindwal, (1996) 5 SCC 60], Koteswar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga& Co. [Koteswar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga& Co., (1969) 1 SCC 255] and A.L.V.R.S.T. Veerappa Chettiar v. I.S. Michael [A.L.V.R.S.T. 6ITA Nos. 2772/Del/2016 & ors ACIT Vs. Indrani Sathe & ors Veer…

Income Tax Officer vs. Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia

C.A. No.-000911-000911 - 2022Supreme Court06 Apr 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

…REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 911 OF 2022 (@ SLP (C) NO. 29096 OF 2019) Income Tax Officer …Appellant(s) Versus Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia …Respondent(s) With CIVIL APPEAL NO. 912 OF 2022 (@ SLP (C) NO. 29109 OF 2019) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 913 OF 2022 (@ SLP (C) NO. 29115 OF 2019) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 914 OF 2022 (@ SLP (C) NO. 29116 OF 2019) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 915 OF 2022 (@ SLP (C) NO. 29118 OF 2019) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 916 OF 2022 (@ SLP (C) NO. 29119 OF 2019) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 911 OF 2022 Page 1 of 67 Digitally signed by N…

The Director of Income-Tax vs. M/S Autodesk Asia Pvt Ltd

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/133/2013HC Karnataka15 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(2)Section 195(1)Section 260Section 260ASection 90

…r, we may advert to well settled rules of Interpretation with regard to taxing statutes. The substitution of a provision results in repeal of earlier provision and its replacement by new provision. [See: U.P.SUGAR MILLS ASSN. VS. STATE OF U.P.’, (2002) 2 SCC 645]. The aforesaid principle of law was reiterated by the Supreme Court in WEST UP SUGAR MILS ASSOCIATION V. STATE OF UP (2012) 2 SCC 773 and by this Court in GOVARDHAN M V. STATE OF 7 KARNATAKA (2013) 1 KarLJ 497. When a new rule in place of an old rule is substituted, the old one is never intended to keep alive and the substitution…

ITO, WD-(It), Kolkata vs. M/S Emami Paper Mills Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 642/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jan 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.642/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2012-2013) Income Tax Officer Vs. M/S Emami Paper Mills Ltd., (International Taxation), 687, Anandapur, E.M.Bypass, Ward, Kolkata, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700107 Room No. 215 Aayakar Bhavan Poorva, 110 Shantipalli,Kolkata-700107 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcg 1428 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By : Shri N.B.Som, Jcit Sr. Dr Assessee By : Shri Ramesh Kumar Patodia, Fca सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 20/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 04/01/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-2013, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, Kolkata, In Appeal No.111/Cit(A)-22/Kol/14-13, Dated 20.01.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 201(1)/1A Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 28.03.2013. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Company, M/S.Emami Paper Mills Limited, Hereafter Called As ‘Deductor’ Has Remitted Some Amount To A Non-Resident Company Of Poland Without Deducting Taxes. Show Cause Notice U/S 201 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Was Issued To The Deductor. In Response, The Deductor Company Submitted M/S Emami Paper Mills Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Kumar Patodia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri N.B.Som, JCIT Sr. DR
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 5(2)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vii)

…e that has to decided is that whether the contract between the appellant and the polish company POL is a 'works contract' or it is a 'contract for technical work". The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders Association of India v. Union of India [1989] 73 STC 370 S.C. observed that "A works contract constitute a class of contracts in which the contractor either himself or through his employee uses certain expertise in performing the work for achieving the task contracted for. That it is in the process of achieving such a task that the contractor utilises his expertise." From the facts emerging out of the r…

M/S.S B Minerals vs. State of Karnataka

WP/17000/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

M/S Kumaraswamy Mineral Exports Ltd vs. State of Karnataka

WP/15432/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

M/S Gavisiddeswara Enterprises vs. The State of Karnataka

WP/17583/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

Smt.R.Mallamma vs. State of Karnataka

WP/31145/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

S V Srinivasulu S/O Late S.V.Chetty vs. The State of Karnataka

WP/15795/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

Sri. M.Srinivasulu vs. State of Karnataka

WP/15985/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

M/S Mehboob Transport Company vs. State of Karnataka

WP/15954/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

M/S. S.B Minerals vs. State of Karnataka

WP/31129/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

M/S Gogga Gurusanthiah & Bros vs. State of Karnataka

WP/16145/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

M/S. the Sandur Manganese & Iron Ore Ltd vs. State of Karnataka

WP/31148/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

Sri.S.A.Thawab vs. State of Karnataka

WP/10712/2009HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

M/S B Ashwathnarayana Singh & Co vs. State of Karnataka & Others

WP/31327/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

H N Premakumar S/O Late H.N.N. Setty vs. State of Karnataka Rep by Its Secretary

WP/6721/2009HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

Banashankari Iron Ore Mines vs. The State of Karnataka

WP/31184/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…

M/S Sandur Manganese and Iron Ore Ltd vs. State of Karnataka

WP/29222/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…sales or sales made outside the State. The said issue came up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders’ Association Of India vs. Union Of India [(1989) 2 SCC 645], wherein it was held that Article 366 of the Constitution of India was a definition clause. The amendment made to the definition clause by incorporating what is called ‘deemed sales’ within the nomenclature of ‘sale of goods’ was also subject to Article 286 of the Constitution. It was held that the two-fold restriction in Article 286 of t…