CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala

252 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2001#156 most cited

What is CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala authority for?

Levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act is mandatory. Tax statutes are to be interpreted strictly, allowing no room for purposive interpretation.

452

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 369,743 Indian tax judgments — from 2002 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala · 252 ITR 1 · mandatory interest · section 234A · section 234B · section 234C · levy of interest · strict interpretation tax laws · purposive interpretation · interest calculation

Also reported as

119 Taxmann 352

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 234ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 147

Issues it is cited on

section 215section 210interest u/s 234csection 115jainterest under section 234cinterest under section 234asection 21mistake apparent on recordinterest u/s 234binterest under section 234bsection 234csection 260

Judgments citing CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala

Mahalakshmi Laboratories Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-17(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 615/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Y.V. Bhanu Narayan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.606/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2021-22) The Income Tax Officer, Mahalakshmi Laboratories Pvt Ward 17(1), Vs. Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN : AADCV8120G अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.615/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Mahalakshmi The Income Tax Officer, Laboratories Pvt Limited, Vs. Ward 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN : AADCV…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 17(1), Hyderabad vs. Mahalakshmi Laboratories Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 606/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Y.V. Bhanu Narayan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.606/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2021-22) The Income Tax Officer, Mahalakshmi Laboratories Pvt Ward 17(1), Vs. Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN : AADCV8120G अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.615/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Mahalakshmi The Income Tax Officer, Laboratories Pvt Limited, Vs. Ward 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN : AADCV…

Tata Consumer Products Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir.-4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

ITA 373/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sriram Sashdari, ARFor Respondent: Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, DR
Section 250Section 43(6)Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 928

…b-initio. In support, reliance is placed on the following decisions: Dr. Shashi Kant Garg v. CIT [2006] 152 Taxman 308/285 ITR 158 (All.) DCIT vs. Rohtas Projects Ltd [2006] 100 ITD 113 (Lucknow) (Third Member) CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala [2001] 119 Taxman 352/252 ITR 1 (SC) Tata Consumer Products Ltd. {erstwhile Tata Global Beverages Ltd.} AYs: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. CIT v. Mahi Valley Hotels & Resorts [2006] 287 ITR 360 (Guj.) Reference is also drawn to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal (Third Member) Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Anima Investment Ltd. [2000] 73 ITD 125 (Delhi) (TM) [18-01-2000] wherein it…

Tata Consumer Products Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir.-4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed

ITA 372/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Years: 2014-15 & Assessment Years: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sriram Sashdari, ARFor Respondent: Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, DR
Section 250Section 43(6)Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 928

…b-initio. In support, reliance is placed on the following decisions: Dr. Shashi Kant Garg v. CIT [2006] 152 Taxman 308/285 ITR 158 (All.) DCIT vs. Rohtas Projects Ltd [2006] 100 ITD 113 (Lucknow) (Third Member) CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala [2001] 119 Taxman 352/252 ITR 1 (SC) Tata Consumer Products Ltd. {erstwhile Tata Global Beverages Ltd.} AYs: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Dy. CIT v. Mahi Valley Hotels & Resorts [2006] 287 ITR 360 (Guj.) Reference is also drawn to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal (Third Member) Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Anima Investment Ltd. [2000] 73 ITD 125 (Delhi) (TM) [18-01-2000] wherein it…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. National E Assessment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…(136 ITR 645) (Del); (143 ITR 29) (Ker); (163 ITR 659) (Karn.); (179 ITR 283) (P&H); and (230 ITR 622) (Karn.). In the following decisions courts have held that circulars are binding on the Revenue: Uco Bank Ltd. Vs CIT (237 ITR 889)(SC); Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1) (SC); K.P. Varghese (131 ITR 597); and Dhiren Chemicals (254 ITR 554). In the following decisions courts have held that even if it is a benevolent circular it is binding on the authorities of the tax department: Navnitlal C. Jhaveri (56 ITR 198 at 203) (SC); Ellerman Lines Ltd versus CIT (82 ITR 913 at 920-1) (SC); K.P. Varghese (131 ITR 597); and…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1 (2), Nagpur

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…(136 ITR 645) (Del); (143 ITR 29) (Ker); (163 ITR 659) (Karn.); (179 ITR 283) (P&H); and (230 ITR 622) (Karn.). In the following decisions courts have held that circulars are binding on the Revenue: Uco Bank Ltd. Vs CIT (237 ITR 889)(SC); Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1) (SC); K.P. Varghese (131 ITR 597); and Dhiren Chemicals (254 ITR 554). In the following decisions courts have held that even if it is a benevolent circular it is binding on the authorities of the tax department: Navnitlal C. Jhaveri (56 ITR 198 at 203) (SC); Ellerman Lines Ltd versus CIT (82 ITR 913 at 920-1) (SC); K.P. Varghese (131 ITR 597); and…

Smt. Deepinder Kaur Johal, Patiala vs. ITO, Ward-4, Patiala

ITA 532/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ManpreetDuggal, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 532/CHD/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 बनाम Smt. Deepinder Kaur Johal, The ITO, 41, Phase 2, Ward – 4, VS New Officers Enclave, Patiala. Patiala. "थायीलेखासं./PAN /TAN No:AGBPJ1466G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh. Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue by : Shri ManpreetDuggal, JCIT, Sr.DR तारीख/Date of Hearing : 27.06.2024 उदघ…

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Fidelity Information Services India Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1328/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, Advocate and Ms. Sumisha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 37(1)

…of the Tribunal has only dealt with one facet of the assessee that liability of interest under section 234B and the fact that the same is mandatory and compensatory, relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Anjum MH Ghaswala [2001] 252 ITR 1 and in the said decision, the following contention raised by the assessee have not been considered: (i) there was no default on the part of the Assessee for payment of taxes pursuant to the modified return filed under section 92CD(3) of the Act as per the provisions of sections 207 to 209 of the Act basis which the Assessee is liable to pay inter…

M/S Pallipuram Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Ernakulam vs. The ITO Non Corp Ward 2(5), Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed, and it’s stay petition, dismissed as infructuous

ITA 322/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Alan P Dev, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 154Section 156Section 234ASection 234A(1)

…ed by the Apex Court per it’s decisions in Mansarovar Commercial Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2023] 453 ITR 661 (SC) and CIT v. Bhagat Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. [2016] 15 SCC 738, rendered following it’s constitutional Bench decision in CIT v. Anjum M.H.Ghaswala [2001] 252 ITR 1 (SC), as also it’s subsequent decision in Karanvir Singh Gossal [2012] 349 ITR 692 (SC). Per the same, adverted to during hearing, it stands abundantly clarified that the matter admits of no two views; the charging of interest u/s.234A, as indeed u/ss. 234B and 234C, mandatory and compensatory in nature, is automatic. Decisions, holding to the cont…

Radha Sharan Goswami, Bhopal vs. DDIT, CPC, Banglore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 527/IND/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniradha Sharan Goswami Ddit, Cpc B-18, Industrial Area Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adzpg1806E Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21.05.2024

Section 143(1)Section 154

…B/C/D is concerned, this is consequential in nature as charging of interest under sections 234A / 234 * B / 234 * C / 234 * D of the I.T. Act is mandatory and not discretionary as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anjuman H Ghaswala reported in 252 ITR 1 and also the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers Page 4 of 6 ITANo.527/Ind/2023 Radha Sharan Goswami reported in 259 ITR 449. Accordingly, this ground of appeal stands PARTLY ALLOWED. Ap 5.3 Ground no 1 Ground no 1 is general in nature and need not be adjudicated upon. 5.4 Ground no 6 in this ground the app…

The Bangalore Fruit Commission Agents Association, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemptions, Ward-2, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 417/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250

…rly, the Appellate Authority had confirmed the interest levied u/s 234B & 234C of the Act by observing that the same are consequential and mandatory in nature by relying on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M.H. Gaswalla reported in (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC). 2.2. The assessee now challenged the above said order of Appellate Authority by contending that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 11 & 12 of the Act since there was an inadvertent mistake in filing the report in form 10B, which was also rectified later on. The assessee further contended that the order of the Ahmedabad Tribunal, relie…

Maharashtra Feeds P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1254/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 234ASection 234CSection 243CSection 245CSection 245DSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)

…the process of settlement/ arbitration. Thus, the nature of the orders under sections 143(1), 143(3) and 144 is different from the orders of the Settlement Commission under section 245D(4). Even in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala and others [252 ITR 1] there is no finding by this Court that the order of Settlement Commission under section 245D(4) is an order of assessment under section 143(3) or under section 144. In Ghaswala's case the only question decided by this Court Maharashtra Feeds P Ltd. is that the interest under section 234B is mandatory in nature and that Settlement Commission, there…

Maharashtra Feeds P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1253/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 234ASection 234CSection 243CSection 245CSection 245DSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)

…the process of settlement/ arbitration. Thus, the nature of the orders under sections 143(1), 143(3) and 144 is different from the orders of the Settlement Commission under section 245D(4). Even in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala and others [252 ITR 1] there is no finding by this Court that the order of Settlement Commission under section 245D(4) is an order of assessment under section 143(3) or under section 144. In Ghaswala's case the only question decided by this Court Maharashtra Feeds P Ltd. is that the interest under section 234B is mandatory in nature and that Settlement Commission, there…

Samata Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Osmanabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Nanded

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

ITA 1259/PUN/2023[A.Y.2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Dec 2023

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1259/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Samata Shikshan Prasarak The Income Tax Officer, Mandal Paranda, V Exemption Ward, C/O. Adhyapak Vidyala, S Nanded. Paranda, Osmanabad- 413502. Maharashtra. Pan: Aahts3344N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri B.S.Rajpurohit – Dr Date Of Hearing 18/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29/12/2023

Section 10Section 139Section 139(40)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 234Section 234ASection 234E

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”बी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1259/PUN/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Samata Shikshan Prasarak The Income Tax Officer, Mandal Paranda, V Exemption Ward, C/o. Adhyapak Vidyala, s Nanded. Paranda, Osmanabad- 413502. Maharashtra. PAN: AAHTS3344N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by None. Revenue by Shri B.S.Rajpurohit – DR Date of hearing 18/12/2023 Date of pronouncement 29/12/2023 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. D…

Tableau Internation Unlimited Copmany the Oval Shelbourne Road Ovel Ballsbridge Dublin, Ireland D04E7K5, Ireland vs. DCIT, Circle3(1)(1) Internatioanal Taxation, Delhi

Appeal stands allowed in terms as indicated above

ITA 1875/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 234DSection 244A

…provisions of the Act an authority is required to exercise powers or to do an act in a particular manner, then that power has to be exercised and the act has to be performed in that manner alone and not in any other manner." CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: [2001] 252 ITR 1 (SC): 16 "It is a normal rule of construction that when a statute vests certain power in an authority to be exercised in a particular manner, then the said authority has to exercise it only in the manner provided in the statute itself." 7.2 In view of the above, the Appellant submits that once the Circular has prescribed a particular manner for is…

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 3553/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Nuclear Power Corporation Of Acit, Range-3(2), India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. Central Avenue, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094. Pan No. Aaacn 3154 F Appellant Respondent

…has not been done in the manner as prescribed under the aw, then it becomes nullity in the under the aw, then it becomes nullity in the eyes of law. Supreme Court in the case of CIT eyes of law. Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala. [2001] 252 ITR 1/119 Taxman ITR 1/119 Taxman 352 ofaseeygettictf it is a normal rule of constructio ofaseeygettictf it is a normal rule of construction that when a statue vests certain powers in an authority t ertain powers in an authority to be exercised in a particular manner, then that authority be exercised in a particular manner, then that authority is bound t…

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 2452/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Nuclear Power Corporation Of Acit, Range-3(2), India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. Central Avenue, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094. Pan No. Aaacn 3154 F Appellant Respondent

…has not been done in the manner as prescribed under the aw, then it becomes nullity in the under the aw, then it becomes nullity in the eyes of law. Supreme Court in the case of CIT eyes of law. Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala. [2001] 252 ITR 1/119 Taxman ITR 1/119 Taxman 352 ofaseeygettictf it is a normal rule of constructio ofaseeygettictf it is a normal rule of construction that when a statue vests certain powers in an authority t ertain powers in an authority to be exercised in a particular manner, then that authority be exercised in a particular manner, then that authority is bound t…

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl. C.I.T, Range 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 3867/MUM/2008[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Nuclear Power Corporation Of Acit, Range-3(2), India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. Central Avenue, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094. Pan No. Aaacn 3154 F Appellant Respondent

…has not been done in the manner as prescribed under the aw, then it becomes nullity in the under the aw, then it becomes nullity in the eyes of law. Supreme Court in the case of CIT eyes of law. Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala. [2001] 252 ITR 1/119 Taxman ITR 1/119 Taxman 352 ofaseeygettictf it is a normal rule of constructio ofaseeygettictf it is a normal rule of construction that when a statue vests certain powers in an authority t ertain powers in an authority to be exercised in a particular manner, then that authority be exercised in a particular manner, then that authority is bound t…

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl. C.I.T, Range 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 4745/MUM/2007[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Nuclear Power Corporation Of Acit, Range-3(2), India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. Central Avenue, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094. Pan No. Aaacn 3154 F Appellant Respondent

…has not been done in the manner as prescribed under the aw, then it becomes nullity in the under the aw, then it becomes nullity in the eyes of law. Supreme Court in the case of CIT eyes of law. Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala. [2001] 252 ITR 1/119 Taxman ITR 1/119 Taxman 352 ofaseeygettictf it is a normal rule of constructio ofaseeygettictf it is a normal rule of construction that when a statue vests certain powers in an authority t ertain powers in an authority to be exercised in a particular manner, then that authority be exercised in a particular manner, then that authority is bound t…

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl. C.I.T, Range 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 4744/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Nuclear Power Corporation Of Acit, Range-3(2), India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. Central Avenue, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094. Pan No. Aaacn 3154 F Appellant Respondent

…has not been done in the manner as prescribed under the aw, then it becomes nullity in the under the aw, then it becomes nullity in the eyes of law. Supreme Court in the case of CIT eyes of law. Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala. [2001] 252 ITR 1/119 Taxman ITR 1/119 Taxman 352 ofaseeygettictf it is a normal rule of constructio ofaseeygettictf it is a normal rule of construction that when a statue vests certain powers in an authority t ertain powers in an authority to be exercised in a particular manner, then that authority be exercised in a particular manner, then that authority is bound t…