CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd.

304 ITR 308Supreme Court of India2008#387 most cited

What is CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

A clarificatory or declaratory amendment to a statutory provision has retrospective effect from the date the original provision came into force, as its purpose is to clarify existing law rather than introduce new law.

229

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. · 304 ITR 308 · Supreme Court · clarificatory amendment retrospective · declaratory statute · retrospective application · statutory interpretation · section 140A · section 115JB · effective date of amendment · tax law amendments

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115JBSection 271(1)(c)Section 14ASection 10(23G)Section 115BBESection 142(1)Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 140a(1)section 215section 207section 2(43)section 262section 209section 2(1)section 208section 210section 115jaasection 140aclarificatory amendment

Judgments citing CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd.

Mawana Sugars Limited., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 4519/DEL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2001-02

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT DR
Section 43B

…ular income. Such computation of statutory income is made only for comparison of tax on such income with tax on book profits. In coming to the conclusion, the High Court referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 308, which was relied upon by the Revenue, pointing out that it was a case of over-statement of loss specifically deemed as concealment under Explanation 4 to section 271(l)(c) and found that this decision had no application to the assessee's facts. The Hon'ble high Court while deciding the case had observed as under: "The question, however, in the p…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-13(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Pratham Telecom India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 479/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

…alth and Food Private Limited, (2008) 304 ITR 308?" 4. Whether on the facts and the circumstances the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the ratio laid down by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Gold Coin Health and Food Private Limited, (2008) 304 ITR 308 that Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Act (as amended by the Finance Act, 2002 w.e.f. 01.04.2003 and Finance Act, 2007 w.e.f. 01.04.2003) is clarifactory and intended to levy the penalty not only in a case where, after addition of concealed income, a loss returned, after assessment becomes positive income but also in a case where additio…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/334/2022HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…t Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected matters Page 99 of 149 or not, it was held in CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) ; (2008) 9 SCC 622 and CIT v. Podar Cement (P.) Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR625 (SC) ; (1997) 5 SCC 482 that, (i) the circumstances under which the amendment was brought in existence, (ii) the consequences of the amendment, and (iii) the scheme of the statute prior and subsequent to the amendment will have to be taken note of. 37. An important…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/206/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…t Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected matters Page 99 of 149 or not, it was held in CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) ; (2008) 9 SCC 622 and CIT v. Podar Cement (P.) Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR625 (SC) ; (1997) 5 SCC 482 that, (i) the circumstances under which the amendment was brought in existence, (ii) the consequences of the amendment, and (iii) the scheme of the statute prior and subsequent to the amendment will have to be taken note of. 37. An important…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/61/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…t Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected matters Page 99 of 149 or not, it was held in CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) ; (2008) 9 SCC 622 and CIT v. Podar Cement (P.) Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR625 (SC) ; (1997) 5 SCC 482 that, (i) the circumstances under which the amendment was brought in existence, (ii) the consequences of the amendment, and (iii) the scheme of the statute prior and subsequent to the amendment will have to be taken note of. 37. An important…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Telstra Singapore Pte Ltd

ITA/55/2023HC Delhi24 Jul 2024

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 9

…t Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.07.2024 19:47:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 334/2022 & connected matters Page 99 of 149 or not, it was held in CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) ; (2008) 9 SCC 622 and CIT v. Podar Cement (P.) Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR625 (SC) ; (1997) 5 SCC 482 that, (i) the circumstances under which the amendment was brought in existence, (ii) the consequences of the amendment, and (iii) the scheme of the statute prior and subsequent to the amendment will have to be taken note of. 37. An important…

M/S. Wipro Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

ITA 492/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyit(Tp)A No.99/Bang/2014

For Appellant: Sri Dhyan Chinnappa, Sr. A.R. andFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 37(1)Section 90Section 90(1)(b)Section 91

…before us as the issue of the nature of such declaratory statutes stands considered by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Vatika Township (P) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 466/227 Taxman 121/49 taxmann.com 249 and CIT v. Gold Coin Health Foods (P.) Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 308/172 Taxman 386 (SC). (r) In the above facts and circumstances, question (iii)(a) is answered in the negative i.e. against the Revenue and in favour of the applicant assessee. Question (iii)(b) is answered in the negative i.e. against the Revenue and in favour of the applicant assessee. Accordingly, we direct the AO to allow the foreign tax paid b…

M/S Wipro Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

ITA 2851/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyit(Tp)A No.99/Bang/2014

For Appellant: Sri Dhyan Chinnappa, Sr. A.R. andFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 37(1)Section 90Section 90(1)(b)Section 91

…before us as the issue of the nature of such declaratory statutes stands considered by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Vatika Township (P) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 466/227 Taxman 121/49 taxmann.com 249 and CIT v. Gold Coin Health Foods (P.) Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 308/172 Taxman 386 (SC). (r) In the above facts and circumstances, question (iii)(a) is answered in the negative i.e. against the Revenue and in favour of the applicant assessee. Question (iii)(b) is answered in the negative i.e. against the Revenue and in favour of the applicant assessee. Accordingly, we direct the AO to allow the foreign tax paid b…

Rita Gupta, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cen. Cir.2(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 46/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 2(14)Section 45Section 45(1)Section 47

…able long term capital gain resulting from sale of any other asset. The Ld. CIT(A) while dismissing the appeal relied on the series of decision namely Harprasad& Co. Pvt. Ltd. [99 ITR 118], CIT vs. J. H Gotla [156 ITR 323], CIT vs. Coin health Food Pvt. Ltd. [304 ITR 308] , decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Kishorebhai Bhikhabhai Virani vs. ACIT [367 ITR 261], decision of Hon’ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of Nikhil Sawhney vs. ACIT [119 taxmann.com 372], decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of DDIT (International Taxation) vs. Asia Pacific Performance SICAV [2015] 55 taxmann.com 333. Aggri…

Income Tax Officer, Vejalpur vs. Digital Biotech Pvt. Ltd., Memnagar

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

ITA 1058/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2016-17 Digital Biotech Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax Officer, Vs A/9, Yashprabha Apartment, Ward-1(1)(3), Behind Janta Ice Cream, Ahmedabad Gurukul Road, Memnagar, Ahmedabad -380052 Pan : Aaccd 1831 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar:

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…loss. Ld. DR placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements:- i. Hon'ble SC in the case of CIT(Central) Delhi v/s. Hariprasad and company (P) Ltd., (1975) 99 ITR 118; ii. Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Gold Coin Health Food Private Limited, [2008] 304 ITR 308; iii. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. J.H. Gotla, [1985] 156 ITR 323. 8. The Ld. DR submitted that if the addition is deleted, assessee would get the benefit of carrying forward of this loss in subsequent years and will set it off against its income in subsequent years. She further submitted that the above income by way of addition ha…

Shivam Builders Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 317/AHD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 317/Ahd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16) िनधा"रण वष" Shivam Builders Private Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम Limited Income Tax Vs. 802, 8Th Floor, Rajvi Circle 4(1)(1), Ahmedabad Arcade, Nr. Gurukul Drive In Road, Memnagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380052 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccs0296D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Hem Chhajed, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/04/2024 09/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 27.07.2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds In This Appeal:

For Respondent: Shri J L Bhatia, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

…positive and negative profits are of a revenue character. Both must enter into computation, wherever it becomes material, in the same mode of the taxable income of the assessee. 10. In the subsequent decision of CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC), it was reiterated by the Apex Court that in view of the decision of CIT v. Harprasad & Co. P. Ltd. (supra), there was irresistible conclusion that income also includes losses. As the income as defined under the Income Tax Act includes losses, the CBDT Instruction regarding jurisdiction of corporate assessee in metro cities being with ACIT/D…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Canara Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 663/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…moval of doubts” and “it is hereby clarified” in Explanation 2 and hence the amendment was clarificatory in nature and can be applied retrospectively. He relied on the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) wherein it was held that if a statute is curative or merely declaratory of the previous law, it has to be applied retrospectively. Thus, the CIT(A) observed that the import of Explanation 2 refer to only one account of provision for bad and doubtful debts, relating to all types of advances including advances made by rural branch. Thus, the a…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 392/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…moval of doubts” and “it is hereby clarified” in Explanation 2 and hence the amendment was clarificatory in nature and can be applied retrospectively. He relied on the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) wherein it was held that if a statute is curative or merely declaratory of the previous law, it has to be applied retrospectively. Thus, the CIT(A) observed that the import of Explanation 2 refer to only one account of provision for bad and doubtful debts, relating to all types of advances including advances made by rural branch. Thus, the a…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…moval of doubts” and “it is hereby clarified” in Explanation 2 and hence the amendment was clarificatory in nature and can be applied retrospectively. He relied on the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) wherein it was held that if a statute is curative or merely declaratory of the previous law, it has to be applied retrospectively. Thus, the CIT(A) observed that the import of Explanation 2 refer to only one account of provision for bad and doubtful debts, relating to all types of advances including advances made by rural branch. Thus, the a…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore vs. Onmobile Global Limited, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 254/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 245/Bang/2023 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Onmobile Global Ltd., Tower #1, 94/1C & 94/2, The Deputy Veerasandra Village, Commissioner Attibele Hobli, Of Income Tax, Anekal Taluk, Circle – 5(1)(2), Electronic City Phase – 1, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaaco3900E Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Onmobile Global Ltd., Tower #1, 94/1C & The Deputy 94/2, Commissioner Of Veerasandra Village, Income Tax, Attibele Hobli, Central Circle – 1(2), Anekal Taluk, Bangalore. Vs. Electronic City Phase – 1, Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaaco3900E Appellant Respondent : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Assessee By Senior Advocate Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr

For Respondent: Shri T. Suryanarayana
Section 271(1)(c)Section 92(3)Section 92C

…8 IT(TP)A No. 245/Bang/2023 & nature of such declaratory statutes stands considered by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Vatika Township (P) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 466/227 Taxman 121/49 taxmann.com 249 and CIT v. Gold Coin Health Foods (P.) Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 308/172 Taxman 386 (SC). (r) In the above facts and circumstances, question (iii)(a) is answered in the negative i.e. against the Revenue and in favour of the applicant assessee. Question (iii)(b) is answered in the negative i.e. against the Revenue and in favour of the applicant assessee. 49. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Inf…

Onmobile Global Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 245/BANG/2023[2013-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2013-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 245/Bang/2023 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Onmobile Global Ltd., Tower #1, 94/1C & 94/2, The Deputy Veerasandra Village, Commissioner Attibele Hobli, Of Income Tax, Anekal Taluk, Circle – 5(1)(2), Electronic City Phase – 1, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaaco3900E Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Onmobile Global Ltd., Tower #1, 94/1C & The Deputy 94/2, Commissioner Of Veerasandra Village, Income Tax, Attibele Hobli, Central Circle – 1(2), Anekal Taluk, Bangalore. Vs. Electronic City Phase – 1, Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaaco3900E Appellant Respondent : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Assessee By Senior Advocate Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr

For Respondent: Shri T. Suryanarayana
Section 271(1)(c)Section 92(3)Section 92C

…8 IT(TP)A No. 245/Bang/2023 & nature of such declaratory statutes stands considered by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Vatika Township (P) Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 466/227 Taxman 121/49 taxmann.com 249 and CIT v. Gold Coin Health Foods (P.) Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 308/172 Taxman 386 (SC). (r) In the above facts and circumstances, question (iii)(a) is answered in the negative i.e. against the Revenue and in favour of the applicant assessee. Question (iii)(b) is answered in the negative i.e. against the Revenue and in favour of the applicant assessee. 49. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Inf…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -1 vs. Augustus Capital Pte. Ltd

The appeal is disposed of, in the aforesaid terms

ITA/405/2022HC Delhi30 Nov 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 9(1)(i)

…2; Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd., (2008) 319 ITR 306 (SC); Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata XII vs. Calcutta Exports Company, (2018) 16 SCC 686; Commissioner of Income Tax I, Ahmedabad vs. Gold Coin Health Food Private Ltd., (2008) 9 SCC 622; Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit & Ors. vs. Dr. Manu & Anr., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 640; Commissioner of Income Tax v. Naresh Kumar, (2014) 362 ITR 256 (Delhi); Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons Private Limited vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd., (2021) 9 SCC 657] (vii) There is no impediment in law in Courts relying upon speeches made…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -1 vs. Augustus Capital Pte. Ltd

The appeal is disposed of, in the aforesaid terms

ITA-405/2022HC Delhi30 Nov 2023
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 9(1)(i)

…2; Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd., (2008) 319 ITR 306 (SC); Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata XII vs. Calcutta Exports Company, (2018) 16 SCC 686; Commissioner of Income Tax I, Ahmedabad vs. Gold Coin Health Food Private Ltd., (2008) 9 SCC 622; Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit & Ors. vs. Dr. Manu & Anr., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 640; Commissioner of Income Tax v. Naresh Kumar, (2014) 362 ITR 256 (Delhi); Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons Private Limited vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd., (2021) 9 SCC 657] (vii) There is no impediment in law in Courts relying upon speeches made…

Wipro Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 370/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Huilgol, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihallli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.370/Bang/2021 Assessment year : 2016-17 M/s. Wipro Limited Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of 76R & 80P, Doddakannellii, Income-tax, Sarjapur Road, Circle-7(1)(2) Bangalore 560 035 Bangalore. PAN: AAACW 0387R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Sandeep Huilgol, Advocate Respondent by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihallli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 03.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2023 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Memb…

Joseph Leslie & Company LLP, Mumbai vs. Circle 22(1), Mumbai, Lalbaug

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

ITA 297/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Joseph Leslie & Company Llp, Circle 22(1), 3Rd Floor, Leslico House, Piramal Chamber, Vs. Bhavani Shankar Road, Lalbaug, Parel, Dadar West, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400028. Pan No. Aahfj 7149 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Richa Gulati Date Of Hearing : 23/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/05/2023 Order

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati
Section 2Section 36Section 43B

…ively of an amendment. These three cases are co-related, and need to be read in a sequence, as below: - Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. vs. CIT (2007) 207 CTR (SC) 733 CIT vs. Raman Lal C. Hathi (2008) 217 CTR (SC) 105 CIT Vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd., (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) In the case of Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. amendment to section 271(1)(c) was held to be prospective by the Apex Court, as the statute categorically stated that it would apply w.e.f. 01.04.2003. On this ground, the Supreme Court held that the amendment cannot be applied to the period prior to 01.04.2003. However, subsequently while deciding th…