CIT v. J.H. Gotla

156 ITR 323Supreme Court of India1985#549 most cited

What is CIT v. J.H. Gotla authority for?

The Supreme Court holds that for income tax purposes, the term 'income' includes 'loss,' allowing for the set-off of a spouse's or minor child's business losses when their income is clubbed with the assessee. This decision emphasizes interpreting tax statutes, especially benevolent provisions, by considering the legislative scheme over a strict literal construction.

176

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. J.H. Gotla · J.H. Gotla · Section 64 · Section 16(3) 1922 Act · clubbing of income · set off of losses · income includes loss · statutory interpretation · liberal construction · benevolent provision · Section 273B · penalty

Also reported as

4 SCC 343

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43BSection 144BSection 10(38)Section 11Section 111A

Issues it is cited on

section 140a(1)section 215section 207section 2(43)section 262section 2(1)section 209section 208section 210section 115jaasection 140aminimum alternate tax

Judgments citing CIT v. J.H. Gotla

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7128/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…ide transactions but even the genuine transactions would be affected. Relying on the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Asstt. Director of Inspection (Investigation) v. Kum. 258 / 122 574 and CIT v. J.H. A.B. Shanthi [2002] 255 ITR Taxman Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 /23 Taxman 14J (SC) counsel for the assessee submitted that if a strict and literal construction of a statute leads to an absurd result, that is, a result not intended to be sub-served by the object of the legislation ascertained from the scheme of the legislation and if another construction is possible apart from the strict and literal construct…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7127/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…ide transactions but even the genuine transactions would be affected. Relying on the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Asstt. Director of Inspection (Investigation) v. Kum. 258 / 122 574 and CIT v. J.H. A.B. Shanthi [2002] 255 ITR Taxman Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 /23 Taxman 14J (SC) counsel for the assessee submitted that if a strict and literal construction of a statute leads to an absurd result, that is, a result not intended to be sub-served by the object of the legislation ascertained from the scheme of the legislation and if another construction is possible apart from the strict and literal construct…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7126/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…ide transactions but even the genuine transactions would be affected. Relying on the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Asstt. Director of Inspection (Investigation) v. Kum. 258 / 122 574 and CIT v. J.H. A.B. Shanthi [2002] 255 ITR Taxman Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 /23 Taxman 14J (SC) counsel for the assessee submitted that if a strict and literal construction of a statute leads to an absurd result, that is, a result not intended to be sub-served by the object of the legislation ascertained from the scheme of the legislation and if another construction is possible apart from the strict and literal construct…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7125/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…ide transactions but even the genuine transactions would be affected. Relying on the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Asstt. Director of Inspection (Investigation) v. Kum. 258 / 122 574 and CIT v. J.H. A.B. Shanthi [2002] 255 ITR Taxman Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 /23 Taxman 14J (SC) counsel for the assessee submitted that if a strict and literal construction of a statute leads to an absurd result, that is, a result not intended to be sub-served by the object of the legislation ascertained from the scheme of the legislation and if another construction is possible apart from the strict and literal construct…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Galaxy Premises P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7124/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 132Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

…ide transactions but even the genuine transactions would be affected. Relying on the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Asstt. Director of Inspection (Investigation) v. Kum. 258 / 122 574 and CIT v. J.H. A.B. Shanthi [2002] 255 ITR Taxman Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 /23 Taxman 14J (SC) counsel for the assessee submitted that if a strict and literal construction of a statute leads to an absurd result, that is, a result not intended to be sub-served by the object of the legislation ascertained from the scheme of the legislation and if another construction is possible apart from the strict and literal construct…

DCIT(E), Circle-2, Kolkata vs. M/S West Bengal Trade Promotion Org., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 156/KOL/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jul 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 147Section 148Section 25

…construction appears very clearly in the terms of the Act or arises by necessary and distinct implication. Dogmatically framed, the rule is no more than a presumption, and thus could be displaced by out weighing factors. CIT vs J.H.Gotla reported in (1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC) If the purpose of a particular provision is easily discernible from the whole of the scheme of the Act which in this case, is to counteract the effect of transfer of assets so far as computation of income of the assessee is concerned, then bearing that purpose in mind, we should find out the intention from the language used by the legislat…

DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kalpana Madhani Securities P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 940/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit-14(2)(1), M/S Kalpana Madhani Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Securities Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 11/1102, Shanti Tower, Vs. M. K. Road, Shanti Path, Near Garodia Mumbai-400020 Nagar, Ghatkopar (East), Mumbai-400077 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aabck2968H

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 73

…facts and circumstances. That loss is only negative income is ITA No.940/Mum/2017 & 6 C.O. No.139/Mum/2018 M/s Kalpana Madhani Securities Pvt. Ltd. trite law, for which we may refer to the decisions by the apex court in the case of CIT vs. J. H. Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 (SC) and CIT vs. Harprasad & Co. (P.) Ltd. [1975] 99 ITR 118 (SC). ‘Loss’, it may be appreciated, arises from the same computation process and mechanism that results in an ‘income’, so that the two clearly bear the same character. As such, therefore, not only is the assessee’s business of purchase and sale of shares a speculative business, it is…

Stewart Holl (India) Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-4(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 979/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: "ी पी.एम .जगताप, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 139(1)Section 33A

…on of the value of the capital assets from taxable income. Therefore, building which have not been specifically defined to include road in the Act must be taken in the legal sense. 4.3.2. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. J.H. Gotla reported in 156 ITR 323 (SC) had held :- 8 Stewart Holl (India) Ltd., AY- 2011-12 "If the purpose of a particular provision is easily discernible from the whole of the scheme of the Act which in this case, is to counteract the effect of transfer of assets so far as computation of income of the assessee is concerned, then bearing that purpose in mind, we should find out…

Stewart Holl Limited, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-4(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2331/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2331/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Stewart Holl (India) Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-4(2), Kolkata [Pan: Aaecs 3091 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.N.Rajendram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 33A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No. 2331/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Stewart Holl (India) Limited -vs- DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata [PAN: AAECS 3091 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri D.N.Rajendram, AR For the Respondent : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 13.02.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 19.02.2018 ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM 1. . This appeal by the Assessee arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Kolkata [in short the ld CIT(A)] in…

M/S. C D Equifinance Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 577/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2018AY 2012-2013
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…Act. Strong reliance in this regard was placed by the assessee on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Dy. CIT vs Metro Exporters Ltd (10 SOT 647). I however do not find merit in the assessee's claim. The Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs J.H. Gotla (156 ITR 323) has specifically held that the term "income" used in the Income-tax Act, 1961 includes "loss". Even the Calcutta High Court in the case of Eastern Aviation & Industries 4 I.T.A. No. 577/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. CD Equifinance Pvt. Ltd. Limited (208 ITR 103) held that the loss is 'negative income'. Accordingly the contention of…

ITO, WD-4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Arcuttipore Tea Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1190/KOL/2015[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2017AY 2003-2004
For Appellant: Shri David Z. Chowngthu, Addl. CIT, ld.DRFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jalan, ld. AR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 43B

…ate required u/s. 43B(ii) of the I.T Act. In view of above, he also added the sum of Rs.9,16,568/- to the total income of the assessee. 6. Before the CIT-A the assessee in support of its contention relied on various following case laws:- • CIT Vs. J.H Gotla 156 ITR 323 (SC) • K.P Verghese Vs.ITO 131 ITR 597(SC) • CIT Vs. Alom Extrusion Ltd 319 ITR 306(SC) • CIT Vs. Vijyashree Ltd ITAT No. 245 of 2011 • GA No. 2607 of 2011(Cal. H.C) • Assessee’s own case ITAT Kolkata ‘A ‘Bench order for the A.Y 1998-99 7. The CIT-A after considering the submissions and case laws mentioned hereinabove restricted the addition to…

Mrs.Kavita Tiwari, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for asst

ITA 1916/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazmrs. Kavita Tiwari, D-202, Adarsh Residency, 8Th Block, Jayanagar, Sangam Circle, Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Bengaluru. . Respondent Pan – Acvpt1583G. Appellant By : Shri R.E Balasubramaniam, C.A Respondent By : Shri M.K Biju, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 16-08-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : -10-2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R.E Balasubramaniam, C.AFor Respondent: Shri M.K Biju, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 54

…rred the observation of Hon'ble Apex Court in which it was suggested not to take only the literal meaning of the statutory provisions but the intention of the legislation should be interpreted. In the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. J.H. Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 (SC), it was observed: "Where the plain literal interpretation of a statutory provision produces a manifestly unjust result which could never have been intended by the Legislature, the court might modify the language used by the Legislature so as to achieve the intention of the Legislature and produce a rational construction. The task of interpre…

Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority, Kolkata vs. J.C.I.T Range - 50, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 724/KOL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Aug 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 723 & 724/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- C.I.T.-Xvii, Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 523 & 524/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- J.C.I.T., Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel Of Assessee For The Respondent : Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2017

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel of AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, CIT
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263

…nless such a construction appears very clearly in the terms of the Act or arises by necessary and distinct implication. Dogmatically framed, the rule is no more than a presumption, and thus could be displaced by out weighing factors." CIT v. J.H. Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323/23 Taxman 14j (SC) "If the purpose of a particular provision is easily discernible from the whole of the scheme of the Act which in this case, is to counteract the effect of transfer of assets so far as computation of income of the assessee is concerned, then bearing that purpose in mind, we should find out the intention from the language used by…

Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority, Kolkata vs. J.C.I.T Range - 50, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 723/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Aug 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 723 & 724/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- C.I.T.-Xvii, Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 523 & 524/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08 Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority -Vs- J.C.I.T., Kolkata [Pan: Aaalk 0714 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel Of Assessee For The Respondent : Shri Anand R. Baiwar, Cit Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.08.2017

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel of AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Anand R. Baiwar, CIT
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263

…nless such a construction appears very clearly in the terms of the Act or arises by necessary and distinct implication. Dogmatically framed, the rule is no more than a presumption, and thus could be displaced by out weighing factors." CIT v. J.H. Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323/23 Taxman 14j (SC) "If the purpose of a particular provision is easily discernible from the whole of the scheme of the Act which in this case, is to counteract the effect of transfer of assets so far as computation of income of the assessee is concerned, then bearing that purpose in mind, we should find out the intention from the language used by…

M/S. Mahasakti Foundation, Kalahandi vs. ACIT, Sambalpur

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

ITA 134/CTK/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 40

…construction appears very clearly in the terms of the Act or arises by necessary and distinct implication. Dogmatically framed, the rule is no more than a presumption, and thus could be displaced by out weighing factors. CIT vs J.H.Gotla reported in (1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC) If the purpose of a particular provision is easily discernible from the whole of the scheme of the Act which in this case, is to counteract the effect of transfer of assets so far as computation of income of the assessee is concerned, then bearing that purpose in mind, we should find out the intention from the language used by the legislat…

ACIT, Circle-10(2), Kolkat, Kolkata vs. M/S. Stewart & Mackertich Wealth Management Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the assessee`s ground No

ITA 1858/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Choudhary, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 73

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri Partha Sarathi Choudhary, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A No.1858/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Stewart &Mackertich Wealth Circle-10(2), Kolkata. Management Ltd. (PAN:AADCS7513E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & I.T.A No.1820/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Stewart &Mackertich Wealth Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Management Ltd. Circle-10, Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 08.02.2017 Date of pronouncement: 12.04.2017 For the Revenue :Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR F…

Stewart and Mackertich Wealth Management Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Circle-10, Kolkata

In the result, the assessee`s ground No

ITA 1820/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Choudhary, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 73

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri Partha Sarathi Choudhary, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A No.1858/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Stewart &Mackertich Wealth Circle-10(2), Kolkata. Management Ltd. (PAN:AADCS7513E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & I.T.A No.1820/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Stewart &Mackertich Wealth Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Management Ltd. Circle-10, Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 08.02.2017 Date of pronouncement: 12.04.2017 For the Revenue :Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR F…

Goldgerg Finance Pvt. Ltd., Thane vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Thane

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

ITA 7496/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7496/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran
Section 10Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 67Section 67ASection 80HSection 80ISection 86

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “G” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7496/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s Goldgerg Finance Pvt. बनाम/ ACIT- Circle – 3, Thane, Ltd., 201, “Arihant” Ashar I.T. Park, 6th floor, v. Building, Parsi Agyari “A” Wing, Lane, Tembhi Naka, Room No. 29, Road No. Thane (W), Pin 400 602. 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane – 400 604. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAACG9549B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by Shri Subodh R…

Jsw Steel Ltd vs. Asst CIT Cir 11(5)

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 75/BANG/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal and Hirali Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alok Johri, D.R
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250

…how as to how it has lead to double taxation. In support of this contention, the Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. JH 9 M/s. JSW Steel Limited (formerly known as Jindal Vijaynagar Steel Limited) Gotla 156 ITR 323. He further submitted that the words used in Explanation 1 (iii) to section 115JB of the Act "the amount of loss brought forward" should not be interpreted in a manner that it defeats the intention of the legislature and leads to absurdity and double jeopardy. The correct interpretation after the amendment is that the loss required to be set off…

M/S. Bharti Airtel Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee with respect to ground No

ITA 5816/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishibharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent) Bharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vaxant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, SrFor Respondent: Sh. NC Swain, CIT DR (OSD)
Section 201Section 254Section 40

…ith penal consequences of disallowance of expenditure, without any finding of default under the primary/ principal provision. It is trite law that any interpretation which results in absurd/ unintended consequences should be avoided [refer CIT vs. J.H. Gotla: 156 ITR 323(SC)]. xix. In the present case, it is respectfully submitted that order under section 201 has been, as stated above, passed in respect of 10 circles holding the assessee to be in default on account of non- payment of tax at source in respect of payments aggregating to Rs.458,74,48,622. Against the said order(s), the appellant has filed appeals, w…