What is CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf authority for?

An Income-tax Tribunal, operating anywhere in the country, must respect and follow the law laid down by any High Court, even if it is a non-jurisdictional High Court, as long as there is no contrary decision from another High Court on that specific legal point. The law declared by such a High Court is considered the final law of the land for the Tribunal.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf?

235 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf (113 ITR 589), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 144B, Section 144C(13), Section 153(1), Section 153(4), Section 153.

CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf (113 ITR 589)

Tata Steel Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8707/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri J. D. Mistry a/wFor Respondent: Shri P. C. Chhotaray

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…e same is binding on us, instead of the decisions of the other Hon’ble High Courts relied upon by the learned DR. Accordingly, the reliance placed by the learned DR on the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Smt. Godavaridevi Saraf, [1978] 113 ITR 589 (Bom.) is also misplaced. Therefore, in light of the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Bansilal B. Raisoni & Sons (supra), we find no merits in the aforesaid submission of the learned DR. 24. The reliance placed by the Revenue on the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in N.Rajgopal v/s Addl. CIT, in IT…

Uttam Energy Limited, Pune vs. ACIT Circle-12, Pune

Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2033/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2033/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Uttam Energy Limited, The Acit, Circle-12, Mahendra Chamber, Mayfair V Pune. Co-Op Housing Society, S A-4, Dhole Patil Road, Pune – 411001. Pan: Aabcu4100H Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Ch Naniwadekar & Kiran Sanmane – Ar;S Revenue By Shri Deepak Garg – Cit Date Of Hearing 16/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Of The Learned Acit, Circle-12, Pune Passed U/Sec. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") After Giving Effect To The Learned Drp’S Order Dated 24.09.2019. 1.1 The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 92BSection 92C

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”सी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “C” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2033/PUN/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Uttam Energy Limited, The ACIT, Circle-12, Mahendra Chamber, Mayfair V Pune. Co-op Housing Society, s A-4, Dhole Patil Road, Pune – 411001. PAN: AABCU4100H Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee by Shri CH Naniwadekar & Kiran Sanmane – AR;s Revenue by Shri Deepak Garg – CIT Date of hearing 16/05/2024 Date of pronouncement 30/05/2024 आदेश/ ORDER…

Panacea Boitec Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addi. CIT National Assessment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 807/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarasstt. Year: 2016-17 Panacea Boitec Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, G-3/B-1 Extension, National Assessment Mohan Coop. Indl Centre, Estate, Mathura Road New Delhi. New Delhi – 110044 Pan Aaacp5335J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 6Section 6(1)Section 92BSection 92C

…of law, the decisions of Hon’ble non-jurisdictional High Court are followed by the lower authorities on account of the persuasive effect of these decisions and on account of the concept of judicial propriety. In the case of CIT Vs Godavari Devi Saraf [(1979) 113 ITR 589 (Bom)], Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court took note of a non-jurisdictional High Court and held that the Tribunal, outside the jurisdiction of that Hon’ble High Court and in the absence of a jurisdictional High Court decision to the contrary, could not be faulted for following the same. Their Lordships observed that, “It should not be overlooked…

Shweta Singh, Mumbai vs. ITO-Ward 33(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3528/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar

Section 250Section 54F

…y to rely upon earlier decisions of this Tribunal even if we were a party to them. Such a High Court being a non-jurisdictional High Court does not alter the position as laid down by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the matter of CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf [1978) 113 ITR 589 (Bom.). Therefore, we do not consider it permissible to rely upon the earlier decisions of this Tribunal even if one of them is by a Special Bench. It will be wholly inappropriate to choose views of one of the High Courts based on our perceptions about reasonableness of the respective viewpoints as such an exercise will de facto amount to sitting…

Shree Cement Limited, Beawar vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 500/JPR/2023[215-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…15JB, the application of other provisions are open, except if specifically barred by the section itself. Deduction u/s 80 IA is not barred by any other decision of Honourable High courts. 43. Honourable Bombay High court in CIT V Godavari Devi Saraf [1978] 113 ITR 589 (Bombay) [27-09-1977] has held that Until a ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. contrary decision is given by any other competent High Court, which is binding on a Tribunal in the State, it has to proceed on the footing that the law declared by the High Court, though of another State, is the final law of the land. 44. Provisions contained in Chapter VI…

Shree Cement Limited, Beawar vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Deputy Commissionerof Income Tax, Circle -2, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 496/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

…15JB, the application of other provisions are open, except if specifically barred by the section itself. Deduction u/s 80 IA is not barred by any other decision of Honourable High courts. 43. Honourable Bombay High court in CIT V Godavari Devi Saraf [1978] 113 ITR 589 (Bombay) [27-09-1977] has held that Until a ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. contrary decision is given by any other competent High Court, which is binding on a Tribunal in the State, it has to proceed on the footing that the law declared by the High Court, though of another State, is the final law of the land. 44. Provisions contained in Chapter VI…

Expat Engineering India Limited, Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Bengaluru

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

ITA 34/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Parithivel, D.R

Section 143Section 250

…ited, Bengaluru Page 15 of 23 41. Though there is a decision of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal, we have followed the decision of the Hon’ble High Court following the rule of judicial discipline as has been held in the case of CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf (113 ITR 589) where the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that - “Until contrary decision is given by any other competent High Court, which is binding on a Tribunal in the State of Bombay, it has to proceed on the footing that the law declared by the High Court, though of another State, is the final law of the land.” 42. The ld AR also made a submission dr…

Dhyan Swamibapa Trust, Senjaldham, Tehsil : Savarkundla, Dist: Amreli vs. The ITO Exemption, Ward-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 244/RJT/2022[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot14 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.244/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-16 Dhyan Swamibapa Trust, Ito Senjaldham, Vs. Ward-1(Exemption), Tehsil Saavarkundala Rajkot. Dist. Amreli-364515 C/O. Sanghavi & Company, Prasham, 4Th Floor, Kasturba Road, Nr. Bilkha Plaza, Rajkot-360001. Pan: Aaatd1598E

For Appellant: Shri G.R Sanghavi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R

Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(1)

…ed. The Bench has further held that the fact that the judgment of the higher judicial forum is from a non- jurisdictional High Court does not really alter this position, as laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf ( 113 ITR 589). For slightly different reasons and alongwith some other observations on the issue, which we shall set out a little later, we are in agreement with the conclusions arrived in this case. 6. That takes us to the question whether this decision stands overruled by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's later judgment in the case of Thana Electricity Co. Lt…

Zainul Abedin Ghaswala, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai

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

ITA 545/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Zainul Abedin Ghaswala, Cit(A), Nfac, At 142/148, Ghaswala Estate Pratyakshakarbhavan, C- S.V. Road, Jogeshwari (West), Vs. 13, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400102. Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Afnpg 7463 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Sunil M. Makhija– Advocate Revenue By : Mr. A.N. Bhalekar, Dr : Date Of Hearing 04/05/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 22/05/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Sunil M. Makhija– AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. A.N. Bhalekar, DR

Section 54F

…rt does not alter the position as laid down by Hon'ble Bombay alter the position as laid down by Hon'ble alter the position as laid down by Hon'ble High Court in the matter of High Court in the matter of CIT v. Godavari Devi CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf [1978] 113 ITR 589 (Bom.). Therefore, we do not [1978] 113 ITR 589 (Bom.). Therefore, we do not consider it permissible to rely upon the earlier consider it permissible to rely upon the earlier consider it permissible to rely upon the earlier decisions of this Tribunal even if one of them is by a decisions of this Tribunal even if one of th decisions of this Tribun…

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Spl. Range-07, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 740/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. KVSR Krishna, Ld. CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumar, Ld. CIT/DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36

…oordinate branches of the Tribunal have taken a particular view- as has been done by the CIT(A), and that it is not the view of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, as is laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the matter of CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf [(1978) 113 ITR 589 (Bom.)]. In the hierarchical judicial system that we have, wisdom of the Court below has to yield 30 to higher wisdom of the Court above and, therefore, one a authority higher than this Tribunal has expressed an opinion on that issue, we are no longer at liberty to rely upon earlier decisions of this Tribunal. The decisions of the coordinate ben…

Expat Engineering India Limited, Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1139/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Ravishankar S.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, JCIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 250Section 37

…TA 1531/Kol/217 dt 05.10.2018 41. Though there is a decision of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal, we have followed the decision of the Hon’ble High Court following the rule of judicial discipline as has been held in the case of CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf (113 ITR 589) where the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that - “Until contrary decision is given by any other competent High Court, which is binding on a Tribunal in the State of Bombay, it has to proceed on the footing that the law declared by the High Court, though of another State, is the final law of the land.” 42. The ld AR also made a submission draw…

Poonam Agarwal, Pune vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax -4, Pune

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 185/PUN/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkheFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263

…s to the Assessing Officer having carried-out adequate inquiry(ies) once he was performing the twin roles of investigator as well as adjudicator as held in Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT [1975] 99 ITR 375 [Del.] as well as CIT vs. Godavaridevi Saraf [1978] 113 ITR 589 [Bom.]. Hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in 18 ITA.No.185/PUN./2021 Mrs. Poonam Agarwal, Pune. Malabar Industrial & Co. Ltd., vs. CIT [2000] 243 ITR 3 (SC) has settled the law long back that Assessing Officer’s action not making such enquiries during the course of scrutiny indeed attracts both these limbs of his assessment being erroneous a…

DCIT-Ltu - 2, Mumbai vs. Ambuja Cements Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2958/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…y to rely upon earlier decisions of this Tribunal even if we were a party to them. Such a High Court being a non-jurisdictional High Court does not alter the position as laid down by Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the matter of CIT v. Godavari Devi Saraf [1978] 113 ITR 589 (Bom.)….” The authorities below were, therefore, not justified in simply brushing aside the judgment of Hon‟ble Madras High Court in the case of PVP Ventures (supra). In any event, even on merits, we may usefully refer to the observations made by a coordinate bench in the case of Dheeraj Amin Vs ACIT [(2016) 71 taxmann.com 288 (Bang)], wherein an…