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 366,470 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

ITO, Ward - 1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Atn International Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 1531/KOL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Rajat Kr. Kureel, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 73

…ration. 3.7.3. We also draw support from the following decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in this regard :- CIT vs Alom Extrusions Ltd reported in 319 ITR 306 (SC) Allied Motors Pvt Ltd vs CIT reported in 224 ITR 677 (SC) CIT vs J.H.Gotla reported in (1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC) at page 339 and 340 3.7.4. We also find that similar view has been taken by the co-ordinate benches of Ahmedabad , Mumbai and this Tribunal supra as rightly pointed out by the ld AR. Respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, Wanchoo Committee report of December 1971 and our findings given hereinabove , we hold…

ITO WD 2(4), Thane vs. Shiv Om Universal, Badlapur

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 6754/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Vachaspati TripathiFor Respondent: Shri Shriram Bajaj
Section 143(3)Section 80

…CIT [1971] 82 ITR 570 (SC) that though equitable considerations are irrelevant in interpreting tax laws, the same are to be interpreted reasonably and in consonance with justice. This in fact stands oft- repeated by the apex court, as in CIT vs. Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 (SC), holding as: ‘Though equity and taxation are often strangers, attempts should be made that these do not remain always so and if a construction results in equity rather than in injustice, then such construction should be preferred to the literal construction.’ Decision 5. In the present case there is, as apparent, no functional relationship…

Bosch Limited, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

ITA 671/BANG/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A.K.Garodia, Accounant Member & Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr CounselFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT-I
Section 154Section 92C(2)

…were employed y the appellant during the year but whose duration of working in that year was less than 300 days. 18. The ld. AR of the assessee placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs J.H.Gotla as reported in 156 ITR 323. He also placed reliance on a Circular No.772 as reported in 235 ITR9 (St.) 35 and submitted that para-45 of the said Circular is relevant. 719((TP)A2011 & ITA No.1211(B)/15 19. The ld. DR of the revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. 20. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that this issue was decided by the ld.…

Punjab Goods Transport Private Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-12(3), Kolkata

ITA 629/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Sept 2016AY 2006-2007

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ] I.T.A No.629/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Punjab Goods Transport Pvt.Ltd. -Vs.- I.T.O., Ward-12(3), Kolkata Kolkata (Pan:Aadcp 2302 E) (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri Amitabh Bhattacharya, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amitabh Bhattacharya, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 192Section 194HSection 201Section 250Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM ] I.T.A No.629/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Punjab Goods Transport Pvt.Ltd. -vs.- I.T.O., Ward-12(3), Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AADCP 2302 E) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Amitabh Bhattacharya, JCIT Date of Hearing : 23.08.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 02.09.2016. O R D E R This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 26.7.2013 of CIT(A)- XII, Kolkata, relating to AY 2006-07. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee…

DCIT, Cen. Cir-VIII, Kolkata vs. M/S Rupa & Co. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 149/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2016AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 149/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2007-08 D.C.I.T., Central Circle-Viii, -Vs.- M/S. Rupa & Co. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcr 2648 M] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Respondent : Shri A.K.Tulsiyan, Fca Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2016. Date Of Pronouncement : 12.08.2016. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri A.K.Tulsiyan, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 194J(1)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM] I.T.A No. 149/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2007-08 D.C.I.T., Central Circle-VIII, -vs.- M/s. Rupa & Co. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : AABCR 2648 M] (Respondent) (Appellant) For the Appellant : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR) For the Respondent : Shri A.K.Tulsiyan, FCA Date of Hearing : 09.08.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 12.08.2016. ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM This is an appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 18.11.2013 of CIT(A)- Central-I, Kolkata relating to AY 2007-08. 2. Grounds of a…

M/S Vasu Developers, Hooghly vs. I.T.O WD - 1(4), Hooghly

ITA 2077/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT.Sr.DR
Section 139(4)Section 194CSection 201Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM] I.T.A No. 2077/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2006-07 M/s. Vastu Developers -vs.- I.T.O. Ward – 1 (4) Hooghly Hooghly [PAN : AAFFV 9826 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT.Sr.DR. Date of Hearing : 10.08.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 12.08.2016. ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 20.5.2013 of CIT(A)- XXXVI, Kolkata, relating to AY 2006-07. 2. The g…

D.C.I.T Cir - 5, Kolkata vs. M/S Raima Equities Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1994/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Divakar Chakraborty, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: ShriAshok Kr. Tulsyan, FCA &
Section 143(3)Section 43Section 73

…1 Raima Equities Pvt. Ltd. AY 2009-10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri M. Balaganesh, AM & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, JM] I.T.A No. 1994/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Raima Equities Pvt. Ltd. Circle-5, Kolkata. (PAN: AABCE2177Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 08.08.2016 Date of pronouncement: 11.08.2016 For the Appellant: Shri Divakar Chakraborty, JCIT, Sr. DR For the Respondent: ShriAshok Kr. Tulsyan, FCA & Shri Amit Kumar, ACA ORDER Per Shri M. Balaganesh, AM: This appeal by revenue is arising out of order of…

Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 955/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri V.C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, D.R
Section 14ASection 73

…x Court held that the first proviso to section 43B of the Act was curative in nature and hence retrospective in operation, i.e. w.e.f. 01.04.1984 from when the section was brought on the statue. 5.6.4 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. J.H. Gotla (156 ITR 323) at page 339 and 340 thereof has observed as under: - "In the case of Varghese v. ITO [1981]131 ITR 597, this court emphasised that a statutory provision must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided. "Where the plain literal interpretation of a statutory provision produces a manifestly unjust result which could n…

Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1349/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri V.C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, D.R
Section 14ASection 73

…x Court held that the first proviso to section 43B of the Act was curative in nature and hence retrospective in operation, i.e. w.e.f. 01.04.1984 from when the section was brought on the statue. 5.6.4 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. J.H. Gotla (156 ITR 323) at page 339 and 340 thereof has observed as under: - "In the case of Varghese v. ITO [1981]131 ITR 597, this court emphasised that a statutory provision must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided. "Where the plain literal interpretation of a statutory provision produces a manifestly unjust result which could n…

Fiduciary Shares & Stocks P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 321/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainfiduciary Shares & Stock P. Ltd. Acit, Circle 4(2) Unit No. T7B, 5Th Floor, Phoenix Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road House, Block No. 2, Phoenix Mills Vs. Mumbai 400020 Compound, 462, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400013 Pan - Aaacf9759N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 73

…ch amendment will have to be given retrospective effect, i.e. from the year in which the Explanation was inserted, the learned A.R. for the assessee referred to/placed reliance on various decisions of the Hon'ble apex Court, inter alia, on CIT vs. J.H. Gotla (156 ITR 323), CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food Pvt. Ltd. (304 ITR 308) and CIT vs. Podar Cement P. Ltd. (226 ITR 625). It was therefore contended by the learned A.R. for the assessee that in view of the amendment made to Explanation to section 73 of the Act, the loss incurred by the assessee on account of trading in shares is not a speculative loss and hence th…

M/S Bharti Hexacom Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed and department’s appeal dismissed

ITA 3394/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra: & Shri A.T. Varkey:

For Appellant: Shri Anil Bhalla CA &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT (DR)
Section 115JSection 194HSection 194JSection 234BSection 35ASection 40Section 54

…ult inasmuch as penalty by way of section 40(a)(ia) would be imposed in an assessment year for a fault, which has been held not being committed in the same very year. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A-One Cycles Ltd. Vs. ACIT 156 ITR 323 (SC), wherein it has been held that interpretation leading to absurd result should be avoided. 20. In the alternative, ld. counsel further submitted that where an assessee was under bona fide belief that tax was not deductible at source on payments made, no fault can be found with the assessee in not deducting the tax at source and, consequently,…

M/S New Alignment, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-51(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 504/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Chowdhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 192Section 194CSection 201Section 40

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘A’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s. New Alignment -versus- I.T.O., Ward-51 (4), Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AAFFN9720M) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant: Shri Soumitra Chowdhury, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 09.03.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 6.4.2016. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM: This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 06.02.2014 of CIT(A) XXXII, Kolkata, relating to AY 2010-11. 2. At the time of hearing of the app…

Sunil Gavaskar, Mumbai vs. ITO (It) 3(1), Mumbai

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3970/MUM/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri D.V. LakhaniFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Waghmade
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 80RSection 8O

…be construed in isolation. Every provision and every word must be looked at generally before any provision or word is attempted to be construed. The setting and pattern are important. 15.9. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision reported in CIT vs. J.H. Gotla 156 ITR 323 (SC), has observed that if a strict and literal construction of the statute leads to an absurd result, i.e., a result not intended to be sub-served by the object of the legislation ascertained from the scheme of the legislation then if another construction is possible apart from the strict literal construction, then that construction should be pr…

Shri Dilip Kumar Roy, Nadia vs. ITO, WD-1, Nadia

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 615/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ] I.T.A No. 615/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumar Roy -Vs.- I.T.O., Ward-1, Nadia Nadia. [Pan : Acwpr 7333R) (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Miss Varsha Jalan, Advocate For The Respondent : David Z. Chawngthu, Affl.Cit

For Appellant: Miss Varsha Jalan, AdvocateFor Respondent: David Z. Chawngthu, Affl.CIT
Section 192Section 194Section 194CSection 201Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM ] I.T.A No. 615/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumar Roy -vs.- I.T.O., Ward-1, Nadia Nadia. [PAN : ACWPR 7333R) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Miss Varsha Jalan, Advocate For the Respondent : David Z. Chawngthu, Affl.CIT Date of Hearing : 14.01.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 3.2.2016. ORDER This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 16.3.2015 of CIT(A)- 12, Kolkata, relating to AY 2009-10. 2. Ground No.1 & 3 raised by the Assessee can be conveniently decided together.…

Prb Marketing Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 663/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Prb Marketing Pvt. Ltd., #192/12-2, 1St ‘C’ Cross, Revenue Layout, 5Th Block, Bsk 3Rd Stage, Bangalore-560085. … Appellant Pan:Aaecp 5655 M Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 12(1), Bangalore. … Respondent Appellant By: Shri S.Venkatesan, Ca. Respondent By: Shri Naresh Saka, Addl.Cit(Dr).

For Appellant: Shri S.Venkatesan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Naresh Saka, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 234Section 40

…atter before us involves the principle of construction to be placed on the provisions of Finance Act, 2003. 16. Before concluding, we extract hereinbelow the relevant observations of this Court in the case of CIT vs. J.H. Gotla (1985) 48 CTR (SC) 363 : (1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC), which reads as under : "We should find out the intention from the language used by the legislature and if strict literal construction leads to an absurd result, i.e., a result not intended to be subserved by the object of the legislation found in the manner indicated before, then if another construction is possible apart from strict literal…

M/S Mitra Guha Builders (India) Co., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-33, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1557/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm] Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri J.M.Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amitav Bhattacharjee, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 192Section 201Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “SMC”, KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM] Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/s. Mitra Guha Builders (India)Co. -versus- D.C.I.T., Circle-33, Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AAFFM 2988 Q) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) For the Appellant : Shri J.M.Thard, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Amitav Bhattacharjee, JCIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 30.11.2015. Date of Pronouncement : 09.12.2015. ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 20.05.2014 of CIT(A)-XIX, Kolkata relating to A.Y.2008-09. 2. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of carrying…

Finmechanics India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4847/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4847/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Fin Mechanics India P. Ltd. Ito-8(1)(4), बनाम/ A-406, The Capital, Aaykar Bhawan, M. K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcf 3599 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Kothari ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. S. Bist सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 01.12.2015 Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2015 Date Of Order आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 07.1.2015, Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2011- 12 Vide Order Dated 26.12.2013. 2. The Appeal Raises Two Grounds, Which We Shall Take Up In Seriatim. The Brief Facts In Relation To The First Ground Are That The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Observed The 2 Fin Mechanics India P. Ltd. Vs. Ito Assessee, A Company In The Business Of Information Technology Services, To Have Not Deducted Tax At Source (Tds) On Professional Fees Properly (I.E., To The Extent Of Rs.4,136/-), Even As Reflected In The Tax Audit Report (Tar) Itself. While The Tax Deduction For Rs.3,861/- Was In The Following Year, I.E., The Previous Year Relevant To A.Y. 2012-13, That For Rs.275/- Was Not Deducted At All. The Same Being Deductible U/S.194J, Prescribing The Rate Of Deduction Of Tax At Source At 10%, He Accordingly Effected Disallowance U/S. 40(A)(Ia) At Rs.41,360/-. The Same Came To Be Confirmed For The Same Reasons, So That, Aggrieved, The Assessee Is In Second Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh KothariFor Respondent: Shri B. S. Bist
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…ended by Finance Act, 2008 w.e.f. 01.4.2008, so that it has now to be read along with rule (37BA), it explains the same to represent a justifiable, commonsense and purposive view, relying on the decision by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT vs. J. H. Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 (SC), wherein it stands held that a tax laws should be applied, as far as the circumstances may admit, in an equitable manner. This was of-course subject to the provisions of law, if any. The tribunal had, in fact, in many cases, so decided even de hors section 199. Similar view stands also expressed by the tribunal in ITO vs. Amee Hosang Mistry…

Sri Ramkrishna Samity, Siliguri vs. D.C.I.T.Cir - 2, Siliguri

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

ITA 1680/KOL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Ananda Sen, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Dr. Adhir kr. Bar, CIT, ld.DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147

…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 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 legislatu…

ITO, Ward-45(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Ashok Trading Company, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 650/KOL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shrin.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07

Section 143(3)(II)Section 194CSection 40Section 68

…atter before us involves the principle of construction to be placed on the provisions of Finance Act, 2003. 16. Before concluding, we extract hereinbelow the relevant observations of this Court in the case of CIT vs. J.H. Gotla (1985) 48 CTR (SC) 363 : (1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC), which reads as under : "We should find out the intention from the language used by the legislature and if strict literal construction leads to an absurd result, i.e., a result not intended to be subserved by the object of the legislation found in the manner indicated before, then if another construction is possible apart from strict literal…

M/S Ravi Spice Processors Private Limited, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, we set aside the orders of lower authorities and remit both the issues under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, back to the AO for verification afresh in accordance with law

ITA 426/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri. N. V. Vasudevan & Shri. Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. T. N. Prakash, JCIT
Section 194CSection 40

…atter before us involves the principle of construction to be placed on the provisions of Finance Act, 2003. 16. Before concluding, we extract hereinbelow the relevant observations of this Court in the case of CIT vs. J.H. Gotla (1985) 48 CTR (SC) 363 : (1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC), which reads as under : "We should find out the intention from the language used by the legislature and if strict literal construction leads to an absurd result, i.e., a result not intended to be subserved by the object of the legislation found in the manner indicated before, then if another construction is possible apart from strict literal…