CIT v. Berger Paints (No.2)

259 ITR 727High Court2003#7524 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Judgments citing CIT v. Berger Paints (No.2)

GANPATI GEMS & JEWELLERS,JAIPUR vs. ASSTT./DY. CIT, CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

ITA 36/JPR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2025AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri G. M. Mehta, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 10ASection 10A(5)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…dings? After analysing various decisions and\nfollowing the principles enunciated in two decisions viz. Hon'ble Punjab &\nHaryana High Court in CIT Vs. Gupta Fabs (2005) 274 ITR 620 and that of the\nHon'ble Kerala High Court in CIT Vs. G. Krishnan Nair (2003) 259 ITR 727 and\nparticularly for the view as taken in Dr.L.M.Singhvi's case by a Division Bench of\nRajasthan High Court, the Couurt held thus - We have no hesitation in coming to\nthe conclusion that the expression "along with return of income" as occurring in\nsub- section (4) of Section 80HHC could always be interpreted as directory so far\nit relates to…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2,, BHARUCH vs. M/S. JAYSHREE AROMATICS PVT. LTD.,, BHARUCH

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2277/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) The Assistant Commissioner Jayshree Aromatics Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, Plot No.4703, 4704, 4705/1-4, Vs Circle-2, Bharuch. Gidc Estate, Ankleshwar, Dist. Bharch – 393002. Pan: Aabcj 8258 R Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 254(1)

…j) 11 Jayshree Aromatics Pvt. Ltd., Bharuch iii. CIT vs. Berger Paints (India) Ltd – 254 ITR 503, 508-09 (Cal) iv. CIT vs. Magnum Export (P) Ltd – 262 ITR 10, 12, 19 (Cal) v. CIT vs. Silver Mines – 170 Taxation 590, 590-91 (Raj) vi. CIT vs. G. Krishnan Nair – 259 ITR 727, 732 (Ker) vii. ITO vs. Novelty Garments – 256 ITR 688 (Raj) 10. The ld.AR of the assessee also filed following documents on record: 1 Acknowledgement of Return of Income and Computation of Income 2 Revised return of Income alongwith commutation of income 3 Audited Annual Financial Statements 4 Tax Audit Report 5 Form No. 56G 6 Revised Form No. 5…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S KSHEER SAGAR DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, all these five appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1162/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita Nos. 1158 To 1162/Jp/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Hotel Royal Orchid, Opp.- Bsnl Jaipur. Office, Near Durgapura Flyover, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018. Pan No.: Aacck 3154 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.R. Sharma, (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur All Dated 31/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2011- 12 To 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 35ASection 43BSection 69C

…M/s Ksheer Sagar Developers P Ltd. any time before completion of assessment. The provision is analogous to same provision contained in Section 80HHA, 80HHC, 80IB (10) etc. of the Act. In case of CIT Vs. Berger Paints (No.2) 254 ITR 503, CIT Vs. Krishnan Nair 259 ITR 727, CIT Vs. Godha Chemicals P. Ltd. 353 ITR 679 and Murli Export Vs. CIT 238 ITR 257 while interpreting the analogous provision of section 80HHC (4) the court held that furnishing of audit certificate alongwith return of income is not mandatory provision, but only directory one, and can be filed at any time before the completion of assessment and th…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S KSHEER SAGAR DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, all these five appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1161/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita Nos. 1158 To 1162/Jp/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Hotel Royal Orchid, Opp.- Bsnl Jaipur. Office, Near Durgapura Flyover, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018. Pan No.: Aacck 3154 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.R. Sharma, (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur All Dated 31/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2011- 12 To 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 35ASection 43BSection 69C

…M/s Ksheer Sagar Developers P Ltd. any time before completion of assessment. The provision is analogous to same provision contained in Section 80HHA, 80HHC, 80IB (10) etc. of the Act. In case of CIT Vs. Berger Paints (No.2) 254 ITR 503, CIT Vs. Krishnan Nair 259 ITR 727, CIT Vs. Godha Chemicals P. Ltd. 353 ITR 679 and Murli Export Vs. CIT 238 ITR 257 while interpreting the analogous provision of section 80HHC (4) the court held that furnishing of audit certificate alongwith return of income is not mandatory provision, but only directory one, and can be filed at any time before the completion of assessment and th…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S KSHEER SAGAR DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, all these five appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1160/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita Nos. 1158 To 1162/Jp/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Hotel Royal Orchid, Opp.- Bsnl Jaipur. Office, Near Durgapura Flyover, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018. Pan No.: Aacck 3154 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.R. Sharma, (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur All Dated 31/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2011- 12 To 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 35ASection 43BSection 69C

…M/s Ksheer Sagar Developers P Ltd. any time before completion of assessment. The provision is analogous to same provision contained in Section 80HHA, 80HHC, 80IB (10) etc. of the Act. In case of CIT Vs. Berger Paints (No.2) 254 ITR 503, CIT Vs. Krishnan Nair 259 ITR 727, CIT Vs. Godha Chemicals P. Ltd. 353 ITR 679 and Murli Export Vs. CIT 238 ITR 257 while interpreting the analogous provision of section 80HHC (4) the court held that furnishing of audit certificate alongwith return of income is not mandatory provision, but only directory one, and can be filed at any time before the completion of assessment and th…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S KSHEER SAGAR DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, all these five appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1159/JPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita Nos. 1158 To 1162/Jp/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Hotel Royal Orchid, Opp.- Bsnl Jaipur. Office, Near Durgapura Flyover, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018. Pan No.: Aacck 3154 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.R. Sharma, (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur All Dated 31/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2011- 12 To 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 35ASection 43BSection 69C

…M/s Ksheer Sagar Developers P Ltd. any time before completion of assessment. The provision is analogous to same provision contained in Section 80HHA, 80HHC, 80IB (10) etc. of the Act. In case of CIT Vs. Berger Paints (No.2) 254 ITR 503, CIT Vs. Krishnan Nair 259 ITR 727, CIT Vs. Godha Chemicals P. Ltd. 353 ITR 679 and Murli Export Vs. CIT 238 ITR 257 while interpreting the analogous provision of section 80HHC (4) the court held that furnishing of audit certificate alongwith return of income is not mandatory provision, but only directory one, and can be filed at any time before the completion of assessment and th…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S KSHEER SAGAR DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, all these five appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1158/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita Nos. 1158 To 1162/Jp/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Hotel Royal Orchid, Opp.- Bsnl Jaipur. Office, Near Durgapura Flyover, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018. Pan No.: Aacck 3154 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.R. Sharma, (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur All Dated 31/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2011- 12 To 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 35ASection 43BSection 69C

…M/s Ksheer Sagar Developers P Ltd. any time before completion of assessment. The provision is analogous to same provision contained in Section 80HHA, 80HHC, 80IB (10) etc. of the Act. In case of CIT Vs. Berger Paints (No.2) 254 ITR 503, CIT Vs. Krishnan Nair 259 ITR 727, CIT Vs. Godha Chemicals P. Ltd. 353 ITR 679 and Murli Export Vs. CIT 238 ITR 257 while interpreting the analogous provision of section 80HHC (4) the court held that furnishing of audit certificate alongwith return of income is not mandatory provision, but only directory one, and can be filed at any time before the completion of assessment and th…

DCIT CC 1, MUMBAI vs. FOREVER PRECIOUS JEWELERY & DIAMOND LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4295/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G S Pannu&Shrisanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri G M Doss– CIT -DRFor Respondent: S/Shri F V Irani& Rajesh Shah
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 68

…h such claim could be rejected. In this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Berger Paints (India) Ltd. 254 ITR 503 Abd the decisions of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. G.Krishnan Nair 259 ITR 727 6.14 Therefore, keeping in view the legal position as stated above I don’t find any reason to deviate from the findings of my ld. Predecessor in this regard. In the given circumstances, there is no ground under which the deduction claimed by the appellant u/s. 10AA can be refused. In view of this, the A.O. is directed to allow the appellant the…

DCIT CEN CIR 1, MUMBAI vs. FOREVER PRECIOUS JEWELLRY & DIAMONDS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3783/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G S Pannu&Shrisanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri G M Doss– CIT -DRFor Respondent: S/Shri F V Irani& Rajesh Shah
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 68

…h such claim could be rejected. In this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Berger Paints (India) Ltd. 254 ITR 503 Abd the decisions of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. G.Krishnan Nair 259 ITR 727 6.14 Therefore, keeping in view the legal position as stated above I don’t find any reason to deviate from the findings of my ld. Predecessor in this regard. In the given circumstances, there is no ground under which the deduction claimed by the appellant u/s. 10AA can be refused. In view of this, the A.O. is directed to allow the appellant the…

DCIT CEN CIR 1, MUMBAI vs. FOREVER PRECIOUS JEWELLERY & DIAMONDS LATD, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3776/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G S Pannu&Shrisanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri G M Doss– CIT -DRFor Respondent: S/Shri F V Irani& Rajesh Shah
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 68

…h such claim could be rejected. In this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Berger Paints (India) Ltd. 254 ITR 503 Abd the decisions of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. G.Krishnan Nair 259 ITR 727 6.14 Therefore, keeping in view the legal position as stated above I don’t find any reason to deviate from the findings of my ld. Predecessor in this regard. In the given circumstances, there is no ground under which the deduction claimed by the appellant u/s. 10AA can be refused. In view of this, the A.O. is directed to allow the appellant the…

DCIT CEN CIR 1, MUMBAI vs. FOREVER PRECIOUS JEWELLERY & DIAMONDS LATD, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3775/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G S Pannu&Shrisanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri G M Doss– CIT -DRFor Respondent: S/Shri F V Irani& Rajesh Shah
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 68

…h such claim could be rejected. In this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Berger Paints (India) Ltd. 254 ITR 503 Abd the decisions of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. G.Krishnan Nair 259 ITR 727 6.14 Therefore, keeping in view the legal position as stated above I don’t find any reason to deviate from the findings of my ld. Predecessor in this regard. In the given circumstances, there is no ground under which the deduction claimed by the appellant u/s. 10AA can be refused. In view of this, the A.O. is directed to allow the appellant the…

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(3) vs. FOREVER PRECIOUS JEWELLERY & DAIMOND LTD.,,

In the result, this appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1142/AHD/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G S Pannu&Shrisanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri G M Doss– CIT -DRFor Respondent: S/Shri F V Irani& Rajesh Shah
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 68

…h such claim could be rejected. In this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Berger Paints (India) Ltd. 254 ITR 503 Abd the decisions of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. G.Krishnan Nair 259 ITR 727 6.14 Therefore, keeping in view the legal position as stated above I don’t find any reason to deviate from the findings of my ld. Predecessor in this regard. In the given circumstances, there is no ground under which the deduction claimed by the appellant u/s. 10AA can be refused. In view of this, the A.O. is directed to allow the appellant the…

RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, we direct the AO to reduce the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act by the amount of reversal of the provision of Rs

ITA 196/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I. C.Sudhir Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishia.Y.: - 2008-09 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Acit 12Th Floor, Devika Tower, Range -15 6, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacr0127N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: 1. Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92D

…revenue dismissed in SLP No. SLP (C) No. 20057 of 2009 v. CIT v. Panama Chemical Works: 245 ITR 684 (MP) vi. CIT V. Berger Paints (India) Limited: 254 ITR 503 (Cal.) vii. CIT V. Punjab Financial Corporation: 254 ITR 6 (P&H) (FB) viii. CIT v. G. Krishna Nair: 259 ITR 727 (Ker) ix. CIT V. Shiva Rice & Dal Mills: 273 ITR 265 (P&H) x. CIT V. Gupta Fabs: 274 ITR 620 (P&H) xi. CIT v. Parry Agro Industries Ltd.: 284 ITR 353 (Ker) xii. CIT v. Panama Chemical Works: 292 ITR 147 (MP) xiii. CIT V. Print Systems & Products: 285 ITR 260 (Mad.) xiv. Amit vegetable Oil Ltd. v. CIT : 158 Taxman 36 (All) xv. CIT v. Shivanand Ele…

TAX-II vs. (P) LTD

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/1295/2008HC Delhi14 Nov 2008
For Appellant: Mr N. P. Sahani & Mr Prakash Chand YadavFor Respondent: Mr B. B. Bhagat, Mr Amit Bhagat and Mr
Section 10ASection 80

…ITA No. 1295 of 2008 Page 1 of 5 * THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on : 14.11.2008 + ITA No. 1295/2008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II ...... Appellant -versus- MANTEC CONSULTANTS (P) LTD ...... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr N. P. Sahani & Mr Prakash Chand Yadav For the Respondent : Mr B. B. Bhagat, Mr Amit Bhagat and Mr Pulkit Gupta CORAM :-…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MANTEC CONSULTANT (P) LTD

The appeal is dismissed

ITA - 1295 / 2008HC Delhi14 Nov 2008
For Appellant: Mr N. P. Sahani & Mr Prakash Chand YadavFor Respondent: Mr B. B. Bhagat, Mr Amit Bhagat and Mr
Section 10ASection 80

…ITA No. 1295 of 2008 Page 1 of 5 * THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on : 14.11.2008 + ITA No. 1295/2008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II ...... Appellant -versus- MANTEC CONSULTANTS (P) LTD ...... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr N. P. Sahani & Mr Prakash Chand Yadav For the Respondent : Mr B. B. Bhagat, Mr Amit Bhagat and Mr Pulkit Gupta CORAM :-…