How many judgments cite CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Limited?

10 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Limited (8 ITR 41), spanning 2017 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Limited come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 127, Section 143(2), Section 143(3), Section 263, Section 54B, Section 54EC.

CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Limited

8 ITR 41High Court1940#10755 most cited

What is CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Limited authority for?

If an assessee's case can be governed by two alternative provisions, they have the right to choose the provision that imposes a lesser burden.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Ltd. · 8 ITR 41 · choice of provision · lesser burden · election of provision · tax burden · assessee's right · alternative provisions · income tax law

Sections most often in play

Section 127 Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263 Section 54B Section 54EC Section 54F

Judgments citing CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Limited

Shri Princepreetjit Singh, Ranjit Nagar vs. Pr.CIT-1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 54/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT, DR(Virtual)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54BSection 54F

…ions available, the choice of the provision which casts lesser burden can be elected and the assesse is justified in electing to be governed as he has computed the deduction u/s 54F. For this proposition, we rely upon:  CIT vs. Bosotto Brothers Ltd., [(1940) 8 ITR 41(Madras HC)]  C.S. Mathur vs. CBDT [(1999) 235 ITR 769 (Delhi HC)] 4.3. Therefore, the allegation of the PCIT that the entire amount was wrongly allowed without applying the proportionate formula is incorrect and contrary to the record. 5. CashInvestment in construction not supported by bills The ‘A’ has made investment in the residential house and…

Geeta Bal Shiksha Samiti, Faridabad vs. CIT(E), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal filed by the Appellant stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4672/DEL/2018[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022

Bench: Narender Kumar Choudhry & Dr. Brr Kumar

Section 10Section 12A

…or the activities carried on by the society then registration 8 GeetaBalShikshaSamiti Vs. CIT u/s 12AA could not be denied on the ground that it was entitled exemption under any other provision. Further in the case of CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Limited [1940] 8 ITR 41 (Mad). Hon'ble ITA N0.469/Asr/ 2018 Border People Educational Society vs. CIT(E) 6 Madras High Court held that if a case appears to be governed by either of two provisions, it is clearly the right of the assessee to claim that he should be taxed under that one which leaves him with a lighter burden. Meaning thereby, if, exemption is available to the…

G.B. Public Educational Society, Faridabad vs. CIT(E), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal filed by the Appellant stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4671/DEL/2018[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022

Bench: Narender Kumar Choudhry & Dr. Brr Kumar

Section 10Section 11Section 12A

…garding genuineness of the objects or the activities carried on by the society then registration u/s 12AA could not be denied on the ground that it was entitled exemption under any other provision. Further in the case of CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Limited [1940] 8 ITR 41 (Mad). Hon'ble ITA N0.469/Asr/ 2018 Border People Educational Society vs. CIT(E) 6 Madras High Court held that if a case appears to be governed by either of two provisions, it is clearly the right of the assessee to claim that he should be taxed under that one which leaves him with a lighter burden. Meaning thereby, if, exemption is available to the…

DCIT, Faridabad vs. M/S Sucon India Ltd, Faridabad

ITA 4418/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. H.K.Choudhary, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &

Section 14ASection 2Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 73

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘G’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner of Income Vs. M/s Sucon India Ltd. Tax, FF-9, Vishnu Palace Circle-II, Block-B, CGO Sector-20B, Ajronda Mod. Complex, NH-IV, Faridabad Faridabad PAN-AAGCS9603L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. H.K.Choudhary, CIT-DR Respondent by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Somil Aggarwal, Adv. Date of hearing : 20.05.2021 Date of pronouncement : 27.05.2021 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM : This ap…

Shree Bhagwan, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 4(2), Gurgaon

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 3173/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 151Section 68Section 69

…ase and appellant is praying to treat the addition on account of cash deposited in the bank account as ‘unexplained income’ u/s 68 having regard to the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bosotto Berothers Ltd. (1940) 8 ITR 41 (Mds. HC). 3. However, at the time of hearing, Ld. AR of the assessee only argued the additional ground no. 1 and stated that this additional ground is purely legal which goes to the root of the matter and all facts and material required for this ground already available on record and therefore, the same needs to be admitted, in view of the Hon’ble…

Kaur Tajinder, Haryana vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Haryana

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 3106/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 151Section 68Section 69

Mesers Border People Education Society, Ferozpur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh

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

ITA 469/ASR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Sainiassessment Year: Nil Border People Educational Cit(Exemptions) Society, Chandigarh. Ferozepur City, Vs. [Pan:Aaabb 0422F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Ld. Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Prabjot Kaur (Ld. CIT-DR)

Section 10Section 12A

…garding genuineness of the objects or the activities carried on by the society then registration u/s 12AA could not be denied on the ground that it was entitled exemption under any other provision. Further in the case of CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Limited [1940] 8 ITR 41 (Mad). Hon'ble 6 ITA N0.469/Asr/ 2018 Border People Educational Society vs. CIT(E) Madras High Court held that if a case appears to be governed by either of two provisions, it is clearly the right of the assessee to claim that he should be taxed under that one which leaves him with a lighter burden. Meaning thereby, if, exemption is available to…

Gram Vikas Educational Society, Ferozpur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh

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

ITA 470/ASR/2018[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Oct 2019AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. B.R. Baskaran & Sh. N.K.Choudhryassessment Year:Nil

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Ld. Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan (Ld. CIT- DR)

Section 10Section 12A

…garding genuineness of the objects or the activities carried on by the society then registration u/s 12AA could not be denied on the ground that it was entitled exemption under any other provision. Further in the case of CIT v. Bosotto Brothers Limited [1940] 8 ITR 41 (Mad). Hon'ble Madras High Court held that if a case appears to be governed by either of two provisions, it is clearly the right of the assessee to claim that he should be taxed under that one which leaves him with a lighter burden. Meaning thereby, if, exemption is available to the assessee in two or more sections then the choice is for the assesse…

DDIT (It) 2(1), Navi Mumbai vs. Swiwer Offshore Pte Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4994/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal and Ms. Indira Anand-AR.sFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru-Sr. DR

Section 254(1)Section 44B

…Ltd.(225taxman58)and Mitchell Drilling Internation -al(P.)Ltd.(380 ITR 130).He further argued that assessee could opt for lower taxes by opting for application of the provisions of section 44B.In that regard he referred to the case of Bosotto Brothers Limited(8 ITR 41).The DR supported the order of the FAA and argued that the ships were used for activities related with exploration/production of mineral oil,that the AO had rightly taxed the assessee u/s.44BB of the Act.He relied upon the case of Halliburton offshore Service Inc.(300 ITR 265). 2.3.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before…

Swiwar Offshore Pte .Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl DIT (It) RG 2, Mumbai

ITA 7939/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal and Ms. Indira Anand-AR.sFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru-Sr. DR

Section 254(1)Section 44B