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.

Acc Limited (Formerly Known As the Associated Cement Companies Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ACIT - Ltu, Mumbai

ITA 417/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…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.” 149. Hon’ble Karnataka High court in the case of WIPRO Limi…

Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5692/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…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.” 149. Hon’ble Karnataka High court in the case of WIPRO Limi…

Acc Ltd ( Formerly Known As the Associated Cement Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

ITA 5655/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…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.” 149. Hon’ble Karnataka High court in the case of WIPRO Limi…

S N Tradelink Private Limited, Surat vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 77/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.77/Srt/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) S. N. Tradelink Private Limited, Principal Commissioner Of 3010-3011 Momai Complex, Income Tax-1, Room No. 114, 1St Kadodra Road, Umarvada, Surat – Vs. Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, 395010. Majura Gate, Opp New Civil Hospital, Surat-395001 (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakcs0060R

Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271ASection 69C

…ct, alter or destroy an existing right and to create new liability or obligation. New liability cannot be created by a subsequent amendment in respect of a transaction when such law was not in the Statute book." • CIT v. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd. [2008] 304 ITR 308/172 Taxman 386 (SC). It has been held by Honourable Supreme Court that "It is a cardinal principle of construction that every statute is prima facie prospective unless it is expressly or by necessary implication made to have a retrospective operation. But the rule in general is applicable where the object of the statute is to affect vested rights…

Anand Swaroop Menawat, Jodhpur vs. CPC, Bengalurue / ACIT/DCIT, Circle, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…r deemed to have applied for the purposes of due dates as under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. On the issue of clarificatory amendments, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had occasion to analyse the issue in detail in teh case of CIT vs Goldcoin Health Foods Pvt. Ltd. 304 ITR 308 (2008) and it was held that if a statute is curative or merely declaratory of the previous law, retrospective operation is generally intended by the legislature. In the same decision, the Hon’ble Bench refer to the principles of statutory interpretation by justice G.P. Singh wherein the language ‘’shall be deemed always to have meant’’ or ‘’shall…

Jagannath Corporation Projects Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 70/CTK/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack13 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.69 & 70/Ctk/2022 22 Assessment Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019 19 & 2019-2020 Jagannath Corporation Projects Jagannath Corporation Projects Vs. Cit (A), Nfac, Delhi Cit (A), Nfac, Delhi Pvt Ltd., Plot No.397, Sarangi Pvt Ltd., Plot No.397, Sarangi Bhawan Garage Chhak, Lewis Bhawan Garage Chhak, Lewis Road, Bhubaneswar Road, Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaccj 3043 M (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tarun Kumar Agarwal Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 13 /10 10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/10 10/2022 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 143(1)Section 22Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…eld that such amendment done in respect of the provisions of Section 22 to 27 of the Act was declaratory and had retrospective operation. He also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) to submit that the introduction Explanation 2 to Section 36 (1)(va) of the I.T.Act, 1961 and Explanation (v) to Section 43B of the Act were to read retrospective. It was also submitted by the ld. Sr. DR that the memorandum itself says that the P a g e 3 | 5 ITA Nos.69 & 70/CTK/2022 Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-2020 provision of amendm…

Jagannath Corporation Projects Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 69/CTK/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack13 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.69 & 70/Ctk/2022 22 Assessment Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019 19 & 2019-2020 Jagannath Corporation Projects Jagannath Corporation Projects Vs. Cit (A), Nfac, Delhi Cit (A), Nfac, Delhi Pvt Ltd., Plot No.397, Sarangi Pvt Ltd., Plot No.397, Sarangi Bhawan Garage Chhak, Lewis Bhawan Garage Chhak, Lewis Road, Bhubaneswar Road, Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaccj 3043 M (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tarun Kumar Agarwal Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 13 /10 10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/10 10/2022 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Kumar AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 143(1)Section 22Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…eld that such amendment done in respect of the provisions of Section 22 to 27 of the Act was declaratory and had retrospective operation. He also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gold Coin Health Food (P) Ltd. (2008) 304 ITR 308 (SC) to submit that the introduction Explanation 2 to Section 36 (1)(va) of the I.T.Act, 1961 and Explanation (v) to Section 43B of the Act were to read retrospective. It was also submitted by the ld. Sr. DR that the memorandum itself says that the P a g e 3 | 5 ITA Nos.69 & 70/CTK/2022 Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-2020 provision of amendm…

Sri Rajanikanth Reddy, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 774/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Miss. Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 36Section 43B

…/s 43B of the I.T.Act, if the payments are made prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. Further, by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd., reported in 304 ITR 308 (SC), the CIT(A) concluded that amendment to section 36(1)(va) and 43B of the I.T.Act by Finance Act, 2021, is clarificatory and has got retrospective operation. 4 Sri Rajanikanth Reddy. 5. Aggrieved, assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. The learned AR relied on the ITAT’s Order in the case of M/s. Shakuntala Agarbathi Company Vs.…

Nikunj Bhai Rukhiyana, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Sambalpur, & DCIT CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 96/CTK/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpianikunj Bhai Rukhiyana, C/O. M.D. & Company Gola Bidi Works, Sadar Bazar Dhamtari, Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh Pan No.Aeepr 7113 P ………………Assessee Versus Ito Sambalpur/ Adit, Cpc. Bengaluru ………………..Revenue Shri M.R.Sahu, Advocate For The Assessee Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr For The Revenue Date Of Hearing : 10/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 25.03.2022, For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Is The Confirmation Of Disallowance U/S.43B Of The Act In Respect Of The Delay In Payment Of Pf & Esi Under The Respective Acts But Paid Before The Due Date Of Filing Of The Return. It Was The Submission That The Disallowance Has Been Made Holding That There Has Been An Amendment To Section 36(1)(Va) By The Finance Act

Section 143(1)Section 22Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अरुण खोड़पऩया ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Nikunj Bhai Rukhiyana, C/o. M.D. & Company Gola Bidi works, Sadar Bazar dhamtari, Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh PAN No.AEEPR 7113 P ………………Assessee Versus ITO Sambalpur/ ADIT, CPC. Bengaluru ………………..Revenue Shri M.R.Sahu, Advocate for the assessee Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR for the Revenue Date of Hearing : 10/10/2022 Date of Pronouncement : 10/10/2022 आदेश / O R D…

Tapan Jena, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Circle Balasore & ADIT, CPC-Bangalore, Balasore

In the result, both appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 87/CTK/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 143(1)Section 22Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अरुण खोड़पऩया ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.28 & 87/CTK/2022 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2018-2019 & 2019-2020) Tapan Jena, Santia Jaleswar, Balasore-756032 PAN No.AEQPJ 4037 G ………………Assessee Versus ACIT, Circle Balasore/ ADIT, CPC. Bengaluru ………………..Revenue Shri M.R.Sahu, Advocate for the assessee Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR for the Revenue Date of Hearing : 10/10/2022 Date of Pronouncement : 1…

Tapan Jena, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Balasore Circle, Balasore, Balesore

In the result, both appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 28/CTK/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 143(1)Section 22Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अरुण खोड़पऩया ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.28 & 87/CTK/2022 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2018-2019 & 2019-2020) Tapan Jena, Santia Jaleswar, Balasore-756032 PAN No.AEQPJ 4037 G ………………Assessee Versus ACIT, Circle Balasore/ ADIT, CPC. Bengaluru ………………..Revenue Shri M.R.Sahu, Advocate for the assessee Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR for the Revenue Date of Hearing : 10/10/2022 Date of Pronouncement : 1…

Della Adventure and Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1708/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 Della Adventure & Resorts Pvt. National Faceless Appeal Ltd., Centre (Nfac), Delhi, 401, Della Tower, 795 Parsi Vs. Colony, Jam-E-Jamshed Road, Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aadcd 2549 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Hitesh P. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Mr. T. Shankar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/09/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Hitesh P. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. T. Shankar, CIT-DR
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…, she relied on CIT v. Podar Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR 625 (SC) and CIT vs. Gold v. Podar Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR 625 (SC) and CIT vs. Gold v. Podar Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR 625 (SC) and CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 308 (SC). Health Food (P.) Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 308 (SC). 18. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the 18. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the 18. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hyderabad Bench of ITAT in the case of Salzgitter Hydraulics…

Della Adventure and Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1707/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 Della Adventure & Resorts Pvt. National Faceless Appeal Ltd., Centre (Nfac), Delhi, 401, Della Tower, 795 Parsi Vs. Colony, Jam-E-Jamshed Road, Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aadcd 2549 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Hitesh P. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Mr. T. Shankar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/09/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Hitesh P. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. T. Shankar, CIT-DR
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…, she relied on CIT v. Podar Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR 625 (SC) and CIT vs. Gold v. Podar Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR 625 (SC) and CIT vs. Gold v. Podar Cement (Pvt.) Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR 625 (SC) and CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 308 (SC). Health Food (P.) Ltd [2008] 304 ITR 308 (SC). 18. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the 18. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the 18. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hyderabad Bench of ITAT in the case of Salzgitter Hydraulics…

Mr. G R Chandrashekar Naidu, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 677/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Gala Ranga, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.K.R.Narayanan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…/s 43B of the I.T.Act, if the payments are made prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. Further, by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd., reported in 304 ITR 308 (SC), the CIT(A) concluded that amendment to section 36(1)(va) and 43B of the I.T.Act by Finance Act, 2021, is clarificatory and has got retrospective operation. 5. Aggrieved, assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. The learned AR relied on the ITAT’s Order in the case of M/s. Shakuntala Agarbathi Company Vs. DICT in ITA No.385/Bang/…

Danish Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-6(1), Jaipur

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 257/JPR/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Aug 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: The Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (C.A.)For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT) a
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…ever deemed to have applied for the purposes of due dates as under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. On the issue of clarificatory amendments, the Honble Supreme Court had occasion to analyse the issue in detail in the case of CIT vs Goldcoin Helath Foods Pvt Ltd 304 ITR 308 92008) and it was held that if a statute is curative or merely declaratory of the previous law, retrospective operation is generally intended by the legislature. In the same decision the Hon'ble Bench refer to the principles of statutory interpretation by justice G.P. Singh wherein the language "shall be deemed always to have meant" or "shall be…

Prahlad Narayan Bairwa, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-7, Jaipur

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 232/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Itat & The Delay Occurred May Kindly Be Condoned.

For Appellant: Miss Shivangi Samdhani (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehara (Addl.CIT) a
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…ever deemed to have applied for the purposes of due dates as under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. On the issue of clarificatory amendments, the Honble Supreme Court had occasion to analyse the issue in detail in the case of CIT vs Goldcoin Helath Foods Pvt Ltd 304 ITR 308 92008) and it was held that if a statute is curative or merely declaratory of the previous law, retrospective operation is generally intended by the legislature. In the same decision the Hon'ble Bench refer to the principles of statutory interpretation by justice G.P. Singh wherein the language "shall be deemed always to have meant" or "shall be…

Dy CIT Central Circle-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Sheth Creators P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2012/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, Cts No. 345A/1 To Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), M/S Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19Th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air India Building, Vs. Plaza, 12Th Floor, Sant Dyaneshwar Nariman Point, Marg, Kala-Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), 101-A & 1202, 1St & 12Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Hallamark Business Plaza, Near Vs. Nariman Point, Gurunanak Hospital, Sant Mumbai-400021. Dyaneshwar Marg, Kalanagar

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. CIT, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, CTS No. 345A/1 to Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. PAN No. AAPCS 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. CIT, Central Circle-4(2), M/s Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air…

Sheth Creators P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Central Circle-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1858/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, Cts No. 345A/1 To Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), M/S Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19Th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air India Building, Vs. Plaza, 12Th Floor, Sant Dyaneshwar Nariman Point, Marg, Kala-Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), 101-A & 1202, 1St & 12Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Hallamark Business Plaza, Near Vs. Nariman Point, Gurunanak Hospital, Sant Mumbai-400021. Dyaneshwar Marg, Kalanagar

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. CIT, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, CTS No. 345A/1 to Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. PAN No. AAPCS 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. CIT, Central Circle-4(2), M/s Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air…

Sheth Creators Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Cent. Cir-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1857/MUM/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, Cts No. 345A/1 To Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), M/S Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19Th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air India Building, Vs. Plaza, 12Th Floor, Sant Dyaneshwar Nariman Point, Marg, Kala-Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), 101-A & 1202, 1St & 12Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Hallamark Business Plaza, Near Vs. Nariman Point, Gurunanak Hospital, Sant Mumbai-400021. Dyaneshwar Marg, Kalanagar

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. CIT, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, CTS No. 345A/1 to Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. PAN No. AAPCS 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. CIT, Central Circle-4(2), M/s Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air…

Sheth Creators Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3696/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, Cts No. 345A/1 To Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), M/S Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19Th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air India Building, Vs. Plaza, 12Th Floor, Sant Dyaneshwar Nariman Point, Marg, Kala-Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), 101-A & 1202, 1St & 12Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Hallamark Business Plaza, Near Vs. Nariman Point, Gurunanak Hospital, Sant Mumbai-400021. Dyaneshwar Marg, Kalanagar

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. CIT, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, CTS No. 345A/1 to Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. PAN No. AAPCS 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. CIT, Central Circle-4(2), M/s Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air…