CIT v. P.Doraiswamy Chetty

183 ITR 559Supreme Court of India1990#17125 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2022.

Judgments citing CIT v. P.Doraiswamy Chetty

SRM SWEETS AND CAKES ,ERODE vs. ADIT-CPC, BANGALORE

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

ITA 545/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jul 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 21.07.2022
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 5

…sec.36(1)(va) and Explanation 5 to sec.43B are to have effect for and from the asst.year 2021-22. 6. The learned CIT(A) erred in not considering section 5 of The General Clauses Act and the impact of the decisions reported in 72 TTR 595 [SC]; 183 ITR 1 [SC]; 183 ITR 559 [sC]; 205 ITR 569 [Bom]; 213 ITR 340, 357 [SC], 243 TTR 56 [SC], 375 TTR 392 [SC], AIR 1995 SC 226, AIR 1996 SC 224 and AIR 1996 SC 238. The learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the decisions of IT AT, more particularly decisions which had clearly discussed the impact of the newly inserted Explanations to sections 361)(va) and 43B. 7. The lea…

M/S. BALASORE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.,BALASORE vs. ACIT, BALASORE CIRCLE, BALASORE

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

ITA 467/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.467/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Balasore Cooperative Bank Vs. Acit, Balasore Circle, Limited, Balasore Bibekananda Marg, Balasore-756001 Pan No. : Aaccb 7823 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahoo,Advs राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 04.08.2017, For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1) That The Order Of The Id. Cit(Appeals) Confirming The Additions & Disallowances Made By The A.O. Is Illegal, Arbitrary, Unjustified & Not In Accordance With Law. 2) That The Addition Of Rs. 36,79,148/- U/S. 40(A)(Ia) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Confirmed By Cit(Appeals) To The Extent Of Rs. 36,30,998/- Is Illegal, Arbitrary, Uncalled For & Not In Accordance With Law & The Same Should Have Been Deleted By The Learned Cit(Appeals). 3) That The Disallowance U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of Rs. 36,79,148/- As Detailed Below Is Illegal, Arbitrary & Unjustified & Hence Should Have Been Deleted By The Learned Cit(A) As The Genuineness Is Not In Doubt. Non-Deduction Of Tds Is A Separate Issue. A) Commission Payment To Dlds Collection Agents Rs. 33,45,248/- B) Legal Expenses Rs. 2,52,000/- C) Audit Fees Rs. 81,900/-

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahoo,AdvsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 36Section 40Section 43B

…d provision to section 40(a)(ia) with effect from 1.4.2013 is not applicable. It is settled law, that the amendment beneficial to the assessee has retrospective effect has been decided by Honourable Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Doraisamy Chetty [1990] 183 ITR 559 (SC). 5) That the authorities below should have allowed sufficient opportunity to the appellant to furnish form 26A from recipients, in the greater interest of justice and fair play. 6) That the disallowance of EPF of Rs. 1,15,570/- u/s.43B is unjustified, illegal, arbitrary and therefore the learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming th…

PRAVINCHANDRA N. KAMDAR,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5194/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: Shri H N Singh
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 132BSection 139Section 143(2)Section 234B

…f Parliament clear, as a principle of interpretation of law” Further, an explanation can have effect even for a period prior to its insertion, though it may not have been made retrospective in its operation, as was pointed out in CIT V P Doraisamy Chetty 1990 183 ITR 559 (SC). It is also noted that section 1328 is a machinery/procedural section, on application of seized or requisitioned 5 I . T . A . N o . 5 1 9 4 / M u m / 2 0 1 5 assets, therefore such an amendment would also have retrospective effect. In the decision cited by the appellant in the case of ACIT v Shri Sanjeev Kumar Goyal, the ITAT, Chandigarh h…

CYFAST ENTERPRISES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 10(3), MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1878/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year:2011-12 Cyfast Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Afl House, Circle-10(3), बनाम/ Lok Bharati Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Marol Maroshi Road, M.K. Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400059 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaacu4945K "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri Sunil Jhunjhunwala राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Anandi Verma-Cit-Dr

Section 50B

…he income also includes loss. In the case of CIT v. Harprasad And Co. Pvt. Ltd. [(1975) 99 ITR 118 (SC)], Their Lordships have categorically held that the income includes loss also. Similar proposition has been reiterated in CIT v. P.Doraiswamy Chetty [(1990) 183 ITR 559 (SC)]. Section 28 dealing with the computation of income under Chapter IV-D states that the income shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession”. Even though the reference has been made only to the “Profits and gains of business or profession”, but it is quite clear that there can be income as well…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WELCOME SEEDS LTD.

ITA/183/2001HC Delhi29 Jul 2005

…it is not at.all nec€ssary that any tax is payable on the total income assessed. If it were linked to the payment of tax then it would be relevant to differentiate between positive income llAlso see: Commissioner Of Income-tnx, Msdras V, P. Doraiswamv Chettv: 183 ITR 559 (SC) where the view taken in Gotla's case (supra) has been followed; Commissioner Of Income-tax. Kerala-ii V. Smt. Man Isnotius: 141 ITR 954 (Ker). J u j({. ITA 205.0Ietc Page No. j2 of 37 up or negative income (loss). But, as penalty is not linked to the factum of payment of tax, it is not necessary to speciff whether total income assessed ref…

CIT v. P.Doraiswamy Chetty (183 ITR 559) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax