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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala?

452 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1), spanning 2002 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 234B, Section 234C, Section 250, Section 234A, Section 142(1).

CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1)

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 5546/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 5542/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 5540/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 4903/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 4901/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 5545/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 5544/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 5543/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 5541/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 4902/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 4898/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the

ITA 4897/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…lowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change…

The Director of Income Tax vs. M/S Texas Instruments Incorporated

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

ITA/171/2011HC Karnataka14 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 234BSection 234bSection 260Section 260A

…assessee being a non resident is not liable to pay advance tax and consequently no interest under Section 234B of the Act is leviable as only TDS can be deducted by ignoring the judgment of the Apex Court in CIT VS. ANJUM MH GHASWALA 5 (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC) where it was held that Section 234B of the Act is mandatory? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was correct in reading down Section 234B of the Act by holding that the same is applicable to Indian residents and not to non residents when the validity has been upheld by this Hon’ble Court by holding that the provisions is only compensato…

The Director of Income-Tax vs. M/S Texas Instruments Incorporated

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

ITA/34/2012HC Karnataka14 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 234BSection 234bSection 260Section 260A

…assessee being a non resident is not liable to pay advance tax and consequently no interest under Section 234B of the Act is leviable as only TDS can be deducted by ignoring the judgment of the Apex Court in CIT VS. ANJUM MH GHASWALA 5 (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC) where it was held that Section 234B of the Act is mandatory? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was correct in reading down Section 234B of the Act by holding that the same is applicable to Indian residents and not to non residents when the validity has been upheld by this Hon’ble Court by holding that the provisions is only compensato…

Sri. K. Shankar Naik, Davangere vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3, Davangere

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 454/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am I.T.A. No.454/Bang/2020 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri K Shankar Naik, Vs. The Ito Ward-3, Davanagare 873-7-23, Jayanagar, C Block, Nituvalli, Davanagare. [Pan:Cnzps 2435M]

Section 234A

…o 2008-09 as reasonable. 5.2 Regarding charging of interest u/s. 234A/234B, the CIT(A) observed that the charging of interest is mandatory and consequential. There is no discretion in the matter as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1). Therefore, the CIT(A) held that no appeal can lie against the order charging interest unless it concerns a perceived or apparent non-application of mind. 6. Against this, the assessee is in appeal before me. The Ld. AR submitted that assessee HUF is having 35 acres of land and income from such land was accumulated from year to year and out of thi…

Siroya Developers, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 409/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Siroya Developers Ito-17(3)(3)[Previously Assessed 101, Kingston Towers, With Acit-31(3)], Gd Ambekar Marg, Parel Tank Mumbai Road, Parel – East, Vs. Mumbai – 400 033

For Appellant: Shri B.V Jhaveri, A.RFor Respondent: Shri. Avaneesh Tiwari, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

…terest u/sss. 234A, 234B and 234C, pursuant to the assessment framed in its hands u/s 143(3) r.w.s 263. As the levy of interest u/sss. 234A, 234B and 234C is mandatory as per the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. M.H Ghaswala (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC), therefore, we do not find any merit in the aforesaid claim of the assessee. The A.O is directed to calculate the interest under the aforesaid statutory provisions while giving appeal effect to our order. The Ground of appeal No. 21 is dismissed. 21. The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations. Siroya D…

M/S. Ibm India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 725/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate along with Ajay Roti, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.V Arvind, Advocate

Section 10ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No.725/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2013–14 IBM India Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner of No.12, Subramanya Arcade, Income Tax, Bannerghatta Road, Circle – 4(1)(2), Bangalore-560 029. Vs. Bangalore. PAN – AAACI 4403 L. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate along with Ajay Roti, C.A Respondent by : Shri K.V Arvind, Advocate, Standing Counsel along Shri Dilip Advocate for Dept. Date of Hearing : 03-06-2020 Date of Pronouncemen…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Yum! Restaurants (Asia) Pte Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6018/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.6018/Del/2012 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DRFor Respondent: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv

Section 143(3)Section 234B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, "द"ल" "यायपीठ “डी”, नई "द"ल" म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI सु"ी सुषमा चावला, उपा"य" एवं "ी "शांत मह"ष", लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, VP & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.6018/Del/2012 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2008-09 The DDIT, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Circle-2(2), New Delhi. vs M/s. Yum! Restaurants (Asia) Pte. Ltd., C/o-M.K.Mandal & Associate, 258, Satyam Tower, Jwalaheri Market, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi-110063. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent PAN-AAACY2204M अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR ""…

Uhde India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(3), Mumbai

ITA 1904/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodthyssenkrupp Indutrial Solutions (India) Additional Commissioner Of Income-Tax 10(3); Private Limited (Formerly Known As Uhde India Mumbai. Vs. Private Limited); Uhde House, L.B.S Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai – 400 0883 Pan – Aaacu1446H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/sshri Niraj Sheth, Darshti Naik & HarmuzdFor Respondent: Shri Debashis Chandra, CIT D.R

Section 143(3)Section 234B

…in terms of our aforesaid observations. 11. The assessee has assailed before us the levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act. As the levy of interest u/s 234B is mandatory as per the judgment of the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Anjum M.H Ghaswala & Ors (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC), therefore, the A.O is directed to rework out the same after giving appellate effect to this order. 12. Before parting, we may herein deal with a procedural issue that though the hearing of the captioned appeal was concluded on 16/01/2020, however, this order is being pronounced much after the expiry of 90 days from the date of conclusion of h…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Soul Space Projects Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 193/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 193/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 1849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs Soul Space Projects Ltd., Central Circle-15, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura New Delhi-110055 Road, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F Co No. 271/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Co No. 284/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Soul Space Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura Central Circle-15, Road, New Delhi-110044 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…llowing decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 5. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 6. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 7. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) My Submission on these case laws are as under:- a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change of opinion for the reason to believe escapement of income. c) Dr. Nalini Mahajan:- These issue was e…

CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala

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

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The Director of Income Tax vs. M/S Texas Instruments Incorporated

The Director of Income-Tax vs. M/S Texas Instruments Incorporated

Sri. K. Shankar Naik, Davangere vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3, Davangere

Siroya Developers, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(3), Mumbai

M/S. Ibm India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bengaluru

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Yum! Restaurants (Asia) Pte Ltd., New Delhi

Uhde India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(3), Mumbai

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Soul Space Projects Ltd., Delhi