CIT v. Naga Hills Tea Co. Ltd.

89 ITR 236Supreme Court of India1973#1228 most cited

What is CIT v. Naga Hills Tea Co. Ltd. authority for?

If a provision of a taxing statute can be reasonably interpreted in two ways, the interpretation favorable to the assessee must be accepted. This fundamental principle ensures fairness when ambiguity exists in tax law.

92

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Naga Hills Tea Co. Ltd. · 89 ITR 236 · Supreme Court 1973 · statutory interpretation tax law · favorable to assessee · two reasonable interpretations · ambiguity in tax statutes · pro-assessee rule

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Naga Hills Tea Co. Ltd.

Sigfriede Infotech P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 10(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result the grounds of the appeal

ITA 7545/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Sigfriede Infotech Pvt. Ito-10(3)(3) Ltd. (Formerly Known As Aayakar Bhavan, Techstar Infotech (India) Pvt. Vs. M.K. Road, Ltd.) 156, Bhandup Village Mumbai-400020. Road, Next To Wmi Cranes Road, Bhandup, West Mumbai-400068. Pan: Aabct7637C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta & Anuj Kushandwala-(Ar) Respondent By : Shri Sachchidanand Dube (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.05.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner (Appeals)-22 Mumbai, Dated 15Th Of October 2013 Which In Turn Arises From Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) On 12Th November

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta &For Respondent: Shri Sachchidanand Dube (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…view favourable to the subject should be preferred. Reference can be made to various judgments of the Apex Court : CIT v. Vegetable ITA No. 7445/Mum/2013-M/s Sigfriede Infotech Pvt. Ltd. Product Ltd. [1973] 88 ITR 192, CIT v. Naga Hills Tea Co. Ltd. [1973] 89 ITR 236, CIT v. Madho Prasad Jatia [1976] 105 ITR 179, CIT v. J.K. Hosiery Factory [1986] 159 ITR 85, Smt. Shashi Gupta v. LIC of India [1995] 84 Comp. Cas. 436, therefore, following the same, it has to be held that mesne profit received for deprivation of use and occupation of property would be capital receipt not chargeable to tax. We hold accordingly.…