CIT v. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe

190 ITR 198High Court1991#7034 most cited
16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 234CSection 143(3)Section 195(1)Section 234BSection 234DSection 40(a)(i)Section 234A

Issues it is cited on

section 195(1)interest under section 234cright to receivelegal representativesection 234dforeign tax creditcredit for tdssection 244asection 234csection 9(1)(vii)interest under section 234bsection 40(a)(i)

Judgments citing CIT v. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe

DELOITTE HASKINS AND SELLS LLP,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 16(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 351/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

…f C.C. Chokshi & Co. travelled before the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay, where the appeals by the Revenue were dismissed by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Court in the case of CIT vs. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe [1991] 190 ITR 198 (Bom). 9.3. On a specific query to the Id. Counsel of the assessee in respect to the findings given in the case of Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (Supra), ld. Counsel took the Bench through the decision and pointed out that Hon'ble' Court has dealt with the issue on identical set of facts by referring to the substantial questions of law. W…

DELOITTE HASKINS AND SELLS LLP,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 16(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 350/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

…f C.C. Chokshi & Co. travelled before the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay, where the appeals by the Revenue were dismissed by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Court in the case of CIT vs. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe [1991] 190 ITR 198 (Bom). 9.3. On a specific query to the Id. Counsel of the assessee in respect to the findings given in the case of Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (Supra), ld. Counsel took the Bench through the decision and pointed out that Hon'ble' Court has dealt with the issue on identical set of facts by referring to the substantial questions of law. W…

DELOITTE HASKINS AND SELLS LLP,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 320/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40

…f C.C. Chokshi & Co. travelled before the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay, where the appeals by the Revenue were dismissed by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Court in the case of CIT vs. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe [1991] 190 ITR 198 (Bom). 9.3. On a specific query to the Id. Counsel of the assessee in respect to the findings given in the case of Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (Supra), ld. Counsel took the Bench through the decision and pointed out that Hon'ble' Court has dealt with the issue on identical set of facts by referring to the substantial questions of law. W…

SIDDHAYU AAURVEDIC RESEARCH FOUNDATION PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/ACIT/ITO/NFAC/// THE ACIT CIRCLE 34(3) (2) , DELHI

In the result this appeal is dismissed with costs

ITA 745/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyalsiddhayu Aayurvedic Research Foundation Pvt. Ltd., C/704, Pramukh Plaza, Cardinal Gracious Road, Chakala, Andheri East, Mumbai-400 069. Pan No. Aaacs8335F ..... Appellant Vs. Acit Circle 4(3) (2) Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri K. C. Selvamani, Ld. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234BSection 270ASection 271ASection 28Section 37(1)

…that essentially this was a case of diversion of income at source. 4. We notice that similar questions have been considered by this Court on numerous occasions. In case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mulla and Mulla and Craigie, Blunt and Caroe reported in 190 ITR 198 the concept of diversion of income at source by overriding title was discussed at length under somewhat similar circumstances. The Court made the following observations:- "In the present case, the assessee-firm was under a legal obligation in terms of the deed of partnership dated September, 1, 1967, and the clauses in the two subsequent partners…

DELOITTE HASKINS AND SELLS LLP,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 16(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4312/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry and Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Ms. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)

…f C.C. Chokshi & Co. travelled before the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay, where the appeals by the Revenue were dismissed by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Court in the case of CIT vs. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe [1991] 190 ITR 198 (Bom). 9.3. On a specific query to the ld. Counsel of the assessee in respect to the findings given in the case of Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (Supra), ld. Counsel took the Bench through the decision and pointed out that Hon'ble’ Court has dealt with the issue on identical set of facts by referring to the substantial questions of law. W…

ACIT 16(3) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. WADIA GHANDY & CO, MUMBAI

In the result, the Appeal is dismissed

ITA 591/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalacit-16(3), Room No. 615, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. ...... Appellant Vs. M/S Wadia Ghandy& Co. N.M. Wadia Building, 123 M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Pan: Aaafw1081H ..... Respondent Appellant/Revenue By : Sh. Satyapal Kumar, Sr.Dr Respondent/Assessee By : Sh. Milin Dattani, Ar Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [For Short ‘(Nfac)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’] Vide Order Dated 22.12.2021 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Grounds Of Appeal Tax Effect Relating To 2 Ita No. 591/Mum/2022-M/S Wadia Ghandy & Co.

For Appellant: Sh. Milin Dattani, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Satyapal Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 37Section 37o

…r placed reliance upon the decision of this Court in Income Tax Appeal No.860 of 2009 dated 19/6/2009 rendered in the respondents-assessee's own case as well as decision of this Court in the case of CIT vs. Mulla and Mulla and Craigie, Blunt and Caroe, (1991) 190 ITR 198 while dismissing the Revenue's appeal. 5. In view of impugned order of the Tribunal merely following the orders of this Court, we are of the view that the appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. 6. It is not necessary to refer to long line of decisions of this Court and other High Courts taking a similar view in the similar circums…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 61(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELOITTE HASKINS & SELLS, GURUGRAM

In the result, the appeal filed for Revenue for AY 2013-14 stands dismissed, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed and appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by the assessee are al...

ITA 5123/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Niraj Setha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Md. Gayasuddin Ansari, Senior DR
Section 40Section 40(1)(ia)

…bay High Court judgement in CIT v. V. G. Bhuta (203 ITR 249) (Bom) (x) Hon’ble Madras High Court judgement in CIT v. V.N.V. Devara Julu Chetty & Co. (18 ITR 357) (Mad) (xi) Hon’ble Bombay High Court judgement in CIT v. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (190 ITR 198) (Bom) (xii) Hon’ble Bombay High Court judgement in CIT v. Nariman B. Bharucha & Sons (130 ITR 863) (Bom) 19. Upon careful consideration, we note that ITAT in assessee’s own case vide order dated 15.01.2021 in ITA No.3715/Del/2017 for AY 2011- 12 and ITA No.3716/Del/2017 for AY 2012-13 has decided this issue in favour of the assessee as under…

DELOITTE HASKINS & SELLS,GURUGRAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed for Revenue for AY 2013-14 stands dismissed, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed and appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by the assessee are al...

ITA 4617/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Niraj Setha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Md. Gayasuddin Ansari, Senior DR
Section 40Section 40(1)(ia)

…bay High Court judgement in CIT v. V. G. Bhuta (203 ITR 249) (Bom) (x) Hon’ble Madras High Court judgement in CIT v. V.N.V. Devara Julu Chetty & Co. (18 ITR 357) (Mad) (xi) Hon’ble Bombay High Court judgement in CIT v. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (190 ITR 198) (Bom) (xii) Hon’ble Bombay High Court judgement in CIT v. Nariman B. Bharucha & Sons (130 ITR 863) (Bom) 19. Upon careful consideration, we note that ITAT in assessee’s own case vide order dated 15.01.2021 in ITA No.3715/Del/2017 for AY 2011- 12 and ITA No.3716/Del/2017 for AY 2012-13 has decided this issue in favour of the assessee as under…

DELOITTE HASKINS & SELLS,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed for Revenue for AY 2013-14 stands dismissed, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed and appeal for AY 2014-15 filed by the assessee are al...

ITA 7236/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Niraj Setha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Md. Gayasuddin Ansari, Senior DR
Section 40Section 40(1)(ia)

…bay High Court judgement in CIT v. V. G. Bhuta (203 ITR 249) (Bom) (x) Hon’ble Madras High Court judgement in CIT v. V.N.V. Devara Julu Chetty & Co. (18 ITR 357) (Mad) (xi) Hon’ble Bombay High Court judgement in CIT v. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (190 ITR 198) (Bom) (xii) Hon’ble Bombay High Court judgement in CIT v. Nariman B. Bharucha & Sons (130 ITR 863) (Bom) 19. Upon careful consideration, we note that ITAT in assessee’s own case vide order dated 15.01.2021 in ITA No.3715/Del/2017 for AY 2011- 12 and ITA No.3716/Del/2017 for AY 2012-13 has decided this issue in favour of the assessee as under…

DELOITTE HASKINS & SELLS,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 61(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2867/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250(6)Section 37(1)Section 40

…ITR 249) (Bom) -Madras High Court judgement in CIT v. V.N.V. Devara Julu Chetty & Co. (18 ITR 357) (Mad) -Supreme Court judgement in CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. (358 ITR 295) (SC) -Bombay High Court judgement in CIT v. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (190 ITR 198) (Bom) Page 6 of 11 Deloitte Haskins & Sells vs. ACIT (C.1) At the time of hearing before us, representatives of both sides, the Ld. Counsel for assessee and Ld. Sr. DR for Revenue were in agreement; that on merits, the issue regarding the assessee’s claim pertaining to aforesaid amount of Rs.1,37,75,514/- was squarely covered in favour of th…

MULLA & MULLA & CRAIGIE BLUNT & CAORE,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 11(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 249/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala &For Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)(ii)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37

…he payments made to the retired partners was an application of income or a diversion by an overriding title. The Assessing Officer further took a view that the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 1967-70 in 190 ITR 198 was decided much before the amendment made in the Act w.e.f 01.04.1993. The Assessing Officer held that overriding title has been created voluntarily by the assessee firm itself and an overriding title cannot be created suo-moto or 4 Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (4 Appeals) voluntarily as per law, therefore, he rejected the argument of…

MULLA & MULLA & CRAIGIE BLUNT & CAORE,MUMBAI vs. JCIT 11(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 5217/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala &For Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)(ii)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37

…he payments made to the retired partners was an application of income or a diversion by an overriding title. The Assessing Officer further took a view that the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 1967-70 in 190 ITR 198 was decided much before the amendment made in the Act w.e.f 01.04.1993. The Assessing Officer held that overriding title has been created voluntarily by the assessee firm itself and an overriding title cannot be created suo-moto or 4 Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe (4 Appeals) voluntarily as per law, therefore, he rejected the argument of…

CREATION PUBLICITY PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 997/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singhassessment Year: 2009-10 Creation Publicity Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, 1St Floor, Parekh Vora Ward-2(1)(2), बनाम/ Chambers, 66, Nagindas Mumbai. Vs. Master Road, Fort, Mumbai. (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcc 2192 B

…tion towards charity by the trust. In support of the above submissions, reliance is placed upon the following 2 decisions, copies of which have been handed over and gone through during the course of hearing: i. 106 ITR 884(Bom) CIT v Crawford Bayley & Co. ii. 190 ITR 198(Bom) CIT v Mulla & Mulla The entire synopsis of these decisions is relied upon. It is also very important to note that one of the grounds for disallowance in (i) above was that the payment was voluntary. That did not 4 Creation Publicity Pvt. Ltd. deter the Bombay High Court from holding that the said amounts were not includible as the income of…

CREATION PUBLICITY PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 999/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia

For Appellant: Shri Hero Rai, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. N. Hemalatha, D.R

…In support of the above submissions, reliance is placed upon the following 2 decisions, copies of which have been handed over and gone through during the course of hearing: M/s. Creation Publicity Pvt. Ltd. i. 106 ITR 884(Bom) CIT v Crawford Bayley & Co. ii. 190 ITR 198(Bom) CIT v Mulla & Mulla The entire synopsis of these decisions is relied upon. It is also very important to note that one of the grounds for disallowance in (i) above was that the payment was voluntary. That did not deter the Bombay High Court from holding that the said amounts were not includible as the income of the assessee. The AO has made…

CREATION PUBLICITY PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 998/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia

For Appellant: Shri Hero Rai, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. N. Hemalatha, D.R

…In support of the above submissions, reliance is placed upon the following 2 decisions, copies of which have been handed over and gone through during the course of hearing: M/s. Creation Publicity Pvt. Ltd. i. 106 ITR 884(Bom) CIT v Crawford Bayley & Co. ii. 190 ITR 198(Bom) CIT v Mulla & Mulla The entire synopsis of these decisions is relied upon. It is also very important to note that one of the grounds for disallowance in (i) above was that the payment was voluntary. That did not deter the Bombay High Court from holding that the said amounts were not includible as the income of the assessee. The AO has made…

CREATION PUBLICITY PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1000/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia

For Appellant: Shri Hero Rai, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. N. Hemalatha, D.R

…In support of the above submissions, reliance is placed upon the following 2 decisions, copies of which have been handed over and gone through during the course of hearing: M/s. Creation Publicity Pvt. Ltd. i. 106 ITR 884(Bom) CIT v Crawford Bayley & Co. ii. 190 ITR 198(Bom) CIT v Mulla & Mulla The entire synopsis of these decisions is relied upon. It is also very important to note that one of the grounds for disallowance in (i) above was that the payment was voluntary. That did not deter the Bombay High Court from holding that the said amounts were not includible as the income of the assessee. The AO has made…