CIT v. New Shorrock Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd.

212 ITR 355High Court#23625 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 153CSection 250Section 69ASection 69CSection 80G(1)Section 80G(4)Section 27

Issues it is cited on

section 80g(1)section 153c proceedingssatisfaction noterule 46aunexplained expenditureescapement of incomesection 80gsection 69cunexplained moneysection 153cincriminating materialundisclosed income

Judgments citing CIT v. New Shorrock Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd.

DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Sudhakar Reddy Nalla, Hyderabad

ITA 776/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Smt. M. Narmada, CIT-DR &
Section 132Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

…liance of the Ld. AR on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. Ltd (supra), the Ld. DR invited our attention to the decisions of Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT Vs. New Shorrock Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd. 212 ITR 355 (Bom), wherein it was held as under : “ The plea of the assessee that there being two decisions of two different High Courts, that beneficial to the assessee should be accepted, could not sustained The question of accepting the principle of beneficial interpretation would arise only in a case where two views are reasonably possible in t opinion o…

DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Sudhakar Reddy Nalla, Hyderabad

ITA 1194/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Smt. M. Narmada, CIT-DR &
Section 132Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

…liance of the Ld. AR on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. Ltd (supra), the Ld. DR invited our attention to the decisions of Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT Vs. New Shorrock Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd. 212 ITR 355 (Bom), wherein it was held as under : “ The plea of the assessee that there being two decisions of two different High Courts, that beneficial to the assessee should be accepted, could not sustained The question of accepting the principle of beneficial interpretation would arise only in a case where two views are reasonably possible in t opinion o…

Sudhakar Reddy Nalla, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

ITA 1098/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Smt. M. Narmada, CIT-DR &
Section 132Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

…liance of the Ld. AR on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. Ltd (supra), the Ld. DR invited our attention to the decisions of Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT Vs. New Shorrock Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd. 212 ITR 355 (Bom), wherein it was held as under : “ The plea of the assessee that there being two decisions of two different High Courts, that beneficial to the assessee should be accepted, could not sustained The question of accepting the principle of beneficial interpretation would arise only in a case where two views are reasonably possible in t opinion o…