C.I.T., Bombay v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd.

1 SCR 788Reported decision1962#14619 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Judgments citing C.I.T., Bombay v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd

ITA/31/2022HC Rajasthan15 Jan 2025

Bench: INDERJEET SINGH,VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

M/S Star Realcon Pvt. Ltd vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr

ITA/31/2022HC Delhi28 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN

Section 38(3)(a)Section 42Section 59(2)

…2308-DB VAT APPEAL 31/2022 & WP(C) 11505/2022 11 of 20 form is not required to be filed in those cases where the refund is embedded in the assessee's return. [See Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd, (1962) 1 SCR 788, T.D. Kumar and Brothers (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calcutta, (1967) 63 ITR 67 and Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle I, Jaipur v. Badri Narain Sita Ram and Another, 1979 SCC OnLine Raj 238]. 12.10 Even in cases where proceedings are pending and refund is withheld in the exercise of powers conferred under Section 39 of the…

Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Atria Hydel Power Limited, Bangalore

In the result, ITA Nos.534 to 556/Bang/2018 and CO Nos

ITA 114/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Years : 2010-11 Income-Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Atria Hydel Power Ltd., Ward - 1(1)(2), #1, Palace Road, Bengaluru. Bangalore-560 001. Pan : Aacca 3754 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 211(2)Section 80I

…violence to the language of the enactment. If the enactment is expressed in language which is fairly capable of either interpretation, it ought to be constued as prospective only." 37. In the case of C.I.T., Bombay v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. (1962) 1 SCR 788, this Court held that as the liability to pay tax is computed according to the law in force at the beginning of the assessment year, i.e., the first day of April, any change in law affecting tax liability after that date though made during the currency of the assessment year, unless specifically made retrospective, does not apply to the assessment…

M/S Atria Power Corproation Ltd., Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1394/BANG/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A.K. Garodiaassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.L. Sowmya Achar, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115JSection 211Section 234Section 80I

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Shin Satellite Public Co. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3593/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri F V Irani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri TS Shivkumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 234BSection 9Section 9(1)

…ntly in CIT v. Vatika Township P. Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 466 (SC) ; [2015] 1 SCC 1, the Constitution Bench, while quoting Govinddas v. ITO [1976] 103 ITR 123 (SC) ; [1976] 1 SCC 906 and CIT v. Scindia Steam Navigation Company Ltd. [1961] 42 ITR 589 (SC) ; [1962] 1 SCR 788 held as follows (page 486 of 367 ITR) : "Of the various rules guiding how a legislation has to be inter preted, one established rule is that unless a contrary intention appears, a legislation is presumed not to be intended to have a ret rospective operation. The idea behind the rule is that a current law should govern current activities. Law passed…

Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3688/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Inturi Rama Rao Assessment Year : 2005-06 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2006-07 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Vs. Assistant Cit, Bses Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Cit, Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), Bses Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aagcs3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “F” NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO Assessment year : 2005-06 BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd., vs. Assistant CIT, BSES Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN: AAGCS3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Deputy CIT, vs. BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd., Circle 3(1), BSES Bhavan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN: AAGCS3187H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment year : 2006-07 BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd., vs. Assistant CIT, BSES Bhawan, Nehru Place, Circle-3(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN: AAGCS3187H) (Appell…