How many judgments cite CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines?

20 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines (20 ITR 572), spanning 2019 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 12AA, Section 12AB, Section 143(3), Section 11, Section 12, Section 12AB(4).

CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines

20 ITR 572Supreme Court of India1951#5702 most cited

What is CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines authority for?

The tax law applicable is the law in force during the assessment year, unless expressly provided or implied otherwise. This principle dictates which version of the law governs tax matters for a particular assessment period.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines · 20 ITR 572 SC · assessment year · tax law in force · cardinal principle · income tax law · assessment procedure · interpretation of statutes · applicable law

Sections most often in play

Section 12AA Section 12AB Section 143(3)Section 11 Section 12 Section 12AB(4)Section 132 Section 10(23C)(vi)

Issues it is cited on

section 12ab(4)(ii)section 12ab(4)section 12aa(1)section 12aa(3)cancellation of registration section 12ab(1)(b)(ii)section 13(1)(d)section 127(2)section 13(1)section 111 section 12a(1)(ac)(i)section 12ab(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines

Hyderabad Science Society, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Exemption Circle 1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1128/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1128/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Hyderabad Science Society, Hyderabad. The Dcit, Vs. Pin - 500 028. Exemption Circle-1(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aaath3789F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca For Revenue : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)

…ssment year 2021-22, he could not invoke the provisions of section 12AB(4)(ii) of the Act which is introduced by Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 1-4-2022 and applicable for the assessment year 2022-23 onwards. 6.4. In the case of Isthmian Steamship Lines reported in 20 ITR 572 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "it is a cardinal principle of the tax law that law to be applied is that in force in the assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication". 6.5. In the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1964] 51 ITR 129 (SC) the same view was taken by the Hon'bl…

Sinhagad Technical Education Society, Pune vs. PCIT(Central), Pune

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

ITA 419/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 May 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoresinhagad Technical Education Society Pcit (Central), Pune Smt. Khilare Marg, Off Karve Road, Vs. Pune – 411004 Pan: Aabts9900Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora & Miss Sampada Ingale Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari - Cit Date Of Hearing : 25-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-05-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Suhas Bora and Miss Sampada IngaleFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari - CIT

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 132

…eceding the assessment year‖; and the expression ―assessment year‖ is defined in clause (9) of section 2 of the Act to mean ―the period of twelve months commencing on the 1st day of April every year‖. 17.5 In the case of CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines (1951) 20 ITR 572 (SC), a 3-judge Bench of this court exposited on the fundamental principle that ―in income-tax matters the law to be applied is the law in force in the assessment year unless otherwise stated or implied.‖ This decision and various other decisions were considered by the Constitution Bench of this court in the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v.…

M/S Truba Education Society, Bhopal vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Bhopal, Bhopal

ITA 801/IND/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Gupta

Section 11Section 127(2)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)

…essment year 2021-22, he could not invoke the provisions of section 12AB(4)(ii) of the Act which is introduced by Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 1.4.2022 and applicable for the assessment year 2022-23 onwards. 6.4 In the case of Isthmian Steamship Lines reported in 20 ITR 572 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "it is a cardinal principle of the tax law that law to be applied is that in force in the assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication". 6.5 In the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala reported in 51 ITR 129 (SC) the same view was taken by the H…

Dera Sacha Sauda, Sirsa vs. PCIT(Central), Gurgaon

ITA 21/CHANDI/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 21/Chd/2024 (Under Section 12Aa) M/S Dera Sacha Sauda, Shah Satnam Ji Dham, Shah Satnam Ji Marg, Sirsa. Vs The Pcit (Central), Gurgaon. स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaatd8359H अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Gupta, Advocate & Shri Saksham Aggarwal, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit,Dr Date Of Hearing 05.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2025 Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp Hybrid Hearing Order The Assessee Is In Appeal Against The Order Of Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central, Gurgaon (In Short 'The Pcit') Dated 27.12.2023 Vide Which Registration Granted Under Section 12Aa Of The Act Dated 13.12.2004 Has Been Cancelled W.E.F. 01.04.2016 By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 12Ab(4) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, Advocate andFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT,DR

Section 11Section 127Section 12ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…itted that ITAT, Bangalore and Cuttack has considered this aspect and unanimously held that the provision is not applicable with retrospective effect. He further relied upon the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Isthmian Steamship Lines (1951) 20 ITR 572(S.C.) and CIT Vs Vatika Township367 ITR 466 (S.C.) dated 14.09.2014. He submitted that at different places, PCIT has exercised the powers for withdrawing registration granted to an assessee and all the Benches of ITAT are unanimous on that point that PCIT is not the competent authority to withdraw such registration. It can only be by CIT (Exemptio…

Aids Society of India, Mumbai vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Pune

ITA 417/PUN/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Mar 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.518/Pun/2023 1. Poona Obstetrics & Gynaecological Society, 302/303, Dr. Neety Mandke Ima House, Tilak Road, Shukrawar Peth, Pune 411 002, Maharashtra Pan : Aaatp1435C Vs. Pr.Cit (Central), Pune Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.522/Pun/2023 2. The Mumbai Obstetrics & Gynaecological Society, C-114, Ist Floor, D-Wing Entrance, Trade World, Kamala City, Senapati Bapat Marg, Low Parel (W), Mumbai-400 013 Maharashtra Pan : Aaatt4562C Vs. Pr.Cit (Central), Pune Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.549/Pun/2023 3. Agra Obstetrical & Gynaecological Society, 84, M.G. Road, Agra 282 010, Uttar Pradesh Pan : Aabta6327K Vs. Pr.Cit (Central), Pune Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.417/Pun/2023 4. Aids Society Of India, Ground Floor, Maharukh Mandsion, Alibhai Premji Marg, Grant Road (E), Mumbai 400 007 Maharashtra Pan : Aabta4129R Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Central), Pune Appellant Respondent 2

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari

Section 12A

…s introduced 49 ITA No.518, 522, 549 and 417/PUN/2023 Poona Obstetrics and Gynaecological Society and 3 others by Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 1.4.2022 and applicable for the assessment year 2022-23 onwards. 6.4 In the case of Isthmian Steamship Lines reported in 20 ITR 572 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that “it is a cardinal principle of the tax law that law to be applied is that in force in the assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication”. 6.5 In the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala reported in 51 ITR 129 (SC) the same view was taken by the H…

M/S. Sri. Srinivasa Educational & Charitable Trust, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 835/BANG/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Years : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA & Shri Mahesh KumarFor Respondent: Shri Jeetendra Kumar, CIT (DR)

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)

…essment year 2021-22, he could not invoke the provisions of section 12AB(4)(ii) of the Act which is introduced by Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 1-4-2022 and applicable for the assessment year 2022-23 onwards. 6.4 In the case of Isthmian Steamship Lines reported in 20 ITR 572 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "it is a cardinal principle of the tax law that law to be applied is that in force in the assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication". 6.5 In the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1964] 51 ITR 129 (SC) the same view was taken by the Hon'ble…

Rahul Agarwal, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 765/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Bharadwaj Sheshadri, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Senthil Kumar N., CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 10(35)Section 111ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…receding the assessment year'; and the expression "assessment year" is defined in clause (9) of section 2 of the Act to mean 'the period of twelve months commencing on the 1st day of April every year'. 17.5 In the case of CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Line [1951] 20 ITR 572 (SC), a 3-Judge Bench of this Court exposited on the fundamental principle that 'in income-tax matters the law to be applied is the law in force in the assessment year unless otherwise stated or implied.' This decision and various other decisions were considered by the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Karmtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v.…

Maa Jagat Janani Seva Trust, Nambira vs. CIT (Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 248/CTK/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jul 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2023-24 Maa Maa Jagat Jagat Janani Janani Seva Seva Vs. Cit (E), Hyderabad Cit (E), Hyderabad Trust, At- -Nambira, Po: Bamebari, Ps: Joda, Dist: Bamebari, Ps: Joda, Dist: Keonjhar Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aadtm 1575 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/0 07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/0 /07/2024

For Appellant: Shri P.K.MishraFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT

Section 12A

…he provisions of section 12AB(4)(ii) of the Act which is introduced by Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 1.4.2022 and applicable for the assessment year 2022-23 onwards. P a g e 7 | 12 Assessment Year : 2023-24 6.4 In the case of Isthmian Steamship Lines reported in 20 ITR 572 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that “it is a cardinal principle of the tax law that law to be applied is that in force in the assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication”. 6.5 In the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala reported in 51 ITR 129 (SC) the same view was taken by the…

M/S. Adarsh Vidya Kendra Trust, Bengaluru vs. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Bangalore

ITA 142/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., D.R

Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 153(9)

…essment year 2021-22, he could not invoke the provisions of section 12AB(4)(ii) of the Act which is introduced by Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 1.4.2022 and applicable for the assessment year 2022-23 onwards. 6.4 In the case of Isthmian Steamship Lines reported in 20 ITR 572 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that “it is a cardinal principle of the tax law that law to be applied is that in force in the assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication”. 6.5 In the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala reported in 51 ITR 129 (SC) the same view was taken by the H…

M/S. Amala Jyothi Vidya Kendra Trust, Bengaluru vs. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Bangalore

ITA 141/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 153(9)

…essment year 2021-22, he could not invoke the provisions of section 12AB(4)(ii) of the Act which is introduced by Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 1.4.2022 and applicable for the assessment year 2022-23 onwards. 6.4 In the case of Isthmian Steamship Lines reported in 20 ITR 572 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that “it is a cardinal principle of the tax law that law to be applied is that in force in the assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication”. 6.5 In the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala reported in 51 ITR 129 (SC) the same view was taken by the H…

Maheswari Mining & Energy Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1220/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Years: 2016-17 Maheswari Mining & Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Energy Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 16(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aagcm0805N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Y. Ratnamkar& B. Satyanarayana Murthy Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Date Of Hearing: 21/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: /04/2022

For Appellant: S/Shri Y. Ratnamkar&For Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Years: 2016-17 Maheswari Mining & Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Energy Pvt. Ltd., Income-tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 16(2), Hyderabad. PAN – AAGCM0805N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: S/Shri Y. Ratnamkar& B. Satyanarayana Murthy Revenue by: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Date of hearing: 21/04/2022 Date of pronouncement: /04/2022 O R D E R PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against CIT(A) – 4,…

M/S. Islamic Academy of Education, Mangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax(Central), Bangalore

ITA 610/BANG/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 12A

…essment year 2021-22, he could not invoke the provisions of section 12AB(4)(ii) of the Act which is introduced by Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 1.4.2022 and applicable for the assessment year 2022-23 onwards. 6.4 In the case of Isthmian Steamship Lines reported in 20 ITR 572 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that “it is a cardinal principle of the tax law that law to be applied is that in force in the assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication”. 6.5 In the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala reported in 51 ITR 129 (SC) the same view was taken by the H…

M/S. Adarsh Vidya Kendra Trust, Bengaluru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 459/BANG/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Harischchandra Naik M., D.R

Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 153(9)

…ITA No.458/Bang/2023 M/s. Amala Jyothi Vidya Kendra Trust, Bangalore M/s. Adarsh Vidya Kendra Trust, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2021-22 M/s. Amala Jyothi Vidya Kendra Trust Sy.No.69, Pipe Line Road BWSSB Colony Chikkagollarahatti PCIT (Central) Vs. Viswaneedam Post Bangalore Magadi Main Road Bengaluru 560 091 PAN NO : AABTA9843Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2021-22 M/s. Adarsh Vidya Kendra Trust 8/9, 27th Cross, Banashankari 2nd Stage PCIT (Central) Vs. B…

M/S. Amala Jyothi Vidya Kendra Trust, Bengaluru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax (Central), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 458/BANG/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Harischchandra Naik M., D.R

Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 153(9)

Sandeep Sethi, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 155/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 115BSection 132(1)

…e. Thus, the amended provisions are applicable from AY 2017-18 onwards. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd v State of Kerala in 60 ITR 262 had held relying upon its own judgement in the case of CIT v Isthmian Steamship Lines, 20 ITR 572 that though the subject of the charge is the income of the previous year, the law to be applied is that in the force in the assessment year, unless otherwise stated or implied (emphasis supplied). The copy of this judgement has already been submitted during the course of the arguments. 3. If the finding of the Hon'ble Co-ordinate Bench is accepted…

Rajiv Nigotiya, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 154/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 115BSection 132(1)

DCIT, Circle- 21(1), New Delhi vs. Religare Enterprises Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed and cross-objection

ITA 7552/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi29 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia:Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Religare Enterprises Income-Tax, Circle-21(1), Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Rajlok New Delhi Building, 24-Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 Pan :Aaacv5888N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…ment of that year. Reference in this regard may be made to the following decisions: •The Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (1979) 120 ITR 921 (SC), following its earlier decisions in CIT vs. Isthmian Steamship Lings (1951) 20 ITR 572 (SC) and Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. vs. State of Kerala (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC) clearly held as under [refer pages 172-175 of CLPB II]: “The assessee claims a vested right under s.24(2)(iii), as it stood before its amendment in 1957, to have the unabsorbed loss of1950-51 carried forwardfromyear to year until the loss is completely absorbed. The c…

M/S. Balasore Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd., Balasore vs. ACIT, Balasore Circle, Balasore

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

ITA 467/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.467/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Balasore Cooperative Bank Vs. Acit, Balasore Circle, Limited, Balasore Bibekananda Marg, Balasore-756001 Pan No. : Aaccb 7823 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahoo,Advs राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 04.08.2017, For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1) That The Order Of The Id. Cit(Appeals) Confirming The Additions & Disallowances Made By The A.O. Is Illegal, Arbitrary, Unjustified & Not In Accordance With Law. 2) That The Addition Of Rs. 36,79,148/- U/S. 40(A)(Ia) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Confirmed By Cit(Appeals) To The Extent Of Rs. 36,30,998/- Is Illegal, Arbitrary, Uncalled For & Not In Accordance With Law & The Same Should Have Been Deleted By The Learned Cit(Appeals). 3) That The Disallowance U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of Rs. 36,79,148/- As Detailed Below Is Illegal, Arbitrary & Unjustified & Hence Should Have Been Deleted By The Learned Cit(A) As The Genuineness Is Not In Doubt. Non-Deduction Of Tds Is A Separate Issue. A) Commission Payment To Dlds Collection Agents Rs. 33,45,248/- B) Legal Expenses Rs. 2,52,000/- C) Audit Fees Rs. 81,900/-

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahoo,AdvsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 36Section 40Section 43B

…expression "assessment year" is defined in clause (9) of Section 2 of the Act to mean 'the period of twelve months commencing on the 1st day of April every year'. 17.5 In the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal v. Isthmian Steamship Lines: (1951) 20 ITR 572, a 3-Judge Bench of this Court exposited on the fundamental principle that 'in income-tax matters the law to be applied is the law in force in the assessment year unless otherwise stated or implied.' This decision and various other decisions were considered by the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v. Stat…

Shree Choudhary Transport Co vs. Income Tax Officer

C.A. No.-007865-007865 - 2009Supreme Court29 Jul 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

Section 40

…ression “assessment year” is defined in clause (9) of Section 2 of the Act to mean ‘the period of twelve months commencing on the 1st day of April every year’. 17.5. In the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal v. Isthmian Steamship Lines: (1951) 20 ITR 572, a 3-Judge Bench of this Court exposited on the fundamental principle that ‘in income-tax matters the law to be applied is the law in force in the assessment year unless otherwise stated or implied.’ This decision and various other decisions were considered by the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v. St…

DCIT Cen Cir 6(3), Mumbai vs. Skil Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 5786/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 14ASection 153A

…asis underlying every income- tax assessment. It is a cardinal principle of the tax law that the law to be applied is that in force in the assessment year unless otherwise provided expressly or by necessary implication - CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines [1951] 20 ITR 572 and Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1966] 60 ITR 262. On that principle, it is abundantly clear that when an assessment for the assessment year 1960-61 is to be made and section 24(2) is invoked, it is section 24(2) as in force in that assessment year which has to be applied. That is the provision as amended by the Finance (No.2)…