Chamanlal Bras Pvt Ltd. v. The Punjab State

174 ITR 566High Court1988#19531 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 200A Section 220(2)Section 234E Section 249(2)(C)Section 249(3)Section 250 Section 5 Section 69A

Judgments citing Chamanlal Bras Pvt Ltd. v. The Punjab State

K.P. Enterprise, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4646/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainkp Enterprises Vs. Ito, Ward 4(1) Shop No. 55, Hs Desai Ashar It Park, 6Th Compound, Shirsad, Floor, Road No. 16Z, Vajreshwari Road, Vasai (E) Wagle Industrial 401208. Estate, Thane (E). Pan/Gir No. Aakfk5524D (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 250Section 5

…when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred - 167 ITR 471 (SC). Further, it is held in the case of Ashok Automobile (Ranchi) Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Bihar (1988) 174 ITR 566, 567 (Pat) that the jurisdiction to condone delay should be exercised liberally and matter relating to condonation of delay should be judged broadly and not in a pedantic manner. While dealing with the condonation of delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the Supreme Court, in Collector, Land Acquisition Vis. Mst. Katiji [(1987) 167…

Jamuna Devi Naresh Chandra Mahavidyalaya, Jalaun vs. ITO-TDS, Kanpur

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

ITA 464/LKW/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, DR

Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

…ere was delay in filing the appeal. It was prayed that the delay in the filing of the appeal was beyond the control of the assessee and citing the judgments of the Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case Ashok Automobile Ranchi (P) Ltd. vs. State of Bihar (1988) 174 ITR 566 (Pat) and that of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector of Land Acquisition vs. MST. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 (HC), the assessee prayed that the delay in the filing of the appeal be condoned and the appeal may be adjudicated on the basis of the grounds on which relief had been sought. After considering the matter, in the interest of justice, th…

Nova Intergrated Systems Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5527/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Nova Integrated Systems Ltd., Vs. Dcit – 1(3)(2), 1St Floor, Bombay House Aayakar Bhavan Modi Street, Fort M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aacch0670G Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 5Section 51

…à-vis following decisions, delay deserves to be condoned. Accordingly, we restore the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding on merits. a. Chamanlal Bras Pvt Ltd v. The Punjab State (1961), 12 STC 643 (Punj.) b. Ashok Automobiles (Ranchi) Pvt Ltd, 174 ITR 566,567. c. K.S.P. ShanmugavelNadar, 153 ITR 596 (Mad.) d. BrijIndar Singh v. Kanshi Ram, AIR 1917 PC 156 e. AsiBai v. Gomathi, AIR 1979 Mad 115,116 f. Punjab State Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd v. State of Punjab, (1999) 116 STC 324,326 (Punj.) 9. Furthermore, as per the provisions of Sub-section 6 of Section 250, order of the Commissi…

Crompton Greaves Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 6(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 4585/MUM/2014[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2017AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm M/S. Crompton Greaves Vs. Dcit – 6(2), Mumbai Ltd., 6Th Floor, C.G.House, Dr. A.B.Road, Prabhadevi Mumbai – 400 025 Pan/Gir No. Aaacc3840K Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 154Section 250Section 80H

…ay deserves to be 7 M/s. Crompton Greaves Ltd., condoned. Accordingly, we restore the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding on merits. a. Chamanlal Bras Pvt Ltd v. The Punjab State (1961), 12 STC 643 (Punj.) b. Ashok Automobiles (Ranchi) Pvt Ltd, 174 ITR 566,567. c. K.S.P. ShanmugavelNadar, 153 ITR 596 (Mad.) d. BrijIndar Singh v. Kanshi Ram, AIR 1917 PC 156 e. AsiBai v. Gomathi, AIR 1979 Mad 115,116 f. Punjab State Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd v. State of Punjab, (1999) 116 STC 324,326 (Punj.) g. Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji, 167 ITR 471,472-73 (SC) 10. In the result, app…