CIT v. Panipat Woollen & General Mills Co. Ltd.

3 SCC 432Supreme Court of India1977#24326 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Judgments citing CIT v. Panipat Woollen & General Mills Co. Ltd.

Huawei Telecommunications (India) Company Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 8260/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Huawei Telecommunications Vs. Dcit, (India) Company Pvt. Ltd., Circle 2(1), 7Th Floor, Tower-A, Spaze-1- Gurgaon Tech Park, Sohna Road, (Haryana) Gurgaon, Haryana Pin: 122 001 Aabch1376E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Deepak Chopra and AnkurFor Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT (DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(1)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…ook) (ii) J.K. Woollen Manufacturers v. CIT (1969) 1 SCR 525 (Refer Page 313-314 of convenience paperbook) (iii) CIT v. Panipat Woollen & General Mills Co. Ltd. (1976) 2 SCC 5 (Page 324 and 326 of convenience paperbook) (iv) Shahzada Nand & Sons v. CIT (1977) 3 SCC 432 (Page 334 of convenience paperbook) (v) S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT (2007) 1 SCC 781 (Page 340-341 of convenience paperbook) (vi) Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 16 SCC 359 (Page 347 of convenience paperbook) (vii) Shiv Raj Gupta v. CIT, Civil Appeal No. 12044/2016, judgement dated 22.07.2020 (Supreme Court) (Page 358 of convenience paperbook) (vi…

M/S. C. J. Group & Gajras Builders & Developers, Panvel, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Bharuch

In the result, this ground of appeal is also dismissed

ITA 2/SRT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.02/Srt/2021 (Ay 2011-12) (Hearing In Physical Court) M/S C.J. Group & Gajras Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Builders & Developers, Vs Bharuch Bhoomi Land Mark, Plot No. 30-30A, Sector-17, Khan Colony, Panvel-410206, Maharashtra Pan No. Aagfc 4658 J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…Appeal No.12044 of 2016) dated 22.07.2020 (SC)  CIT vs. Walchand &Co. (1967) 3 SCR 214 (SC)  J.K.Woollen Manufacturers vs. CIT (1969) 1 SCR 525 (SC)  CIT vs. Panipat Woollen & General Mills Co. Ltd. (1976) 2 SCC 5 (SC)  Shahzada Nand & Sons v. CIT (1977) 3 SCC 432 (SC)  S.A Builders Ltd. vs. CIT (12007) 1 SCC 781 (SC)  Kay Dee Industries vs. JCIT (ITA No.2069 of 2016) dated 09.08.2018 (Trib-Delhi)  CIT vs. Navsari Cotton Silk Mills Ltd. (1982) 135 ITR 546 (Guj) 11. On the other hand, Ld. Sr-DR for the Revenue supported the order of lower authorities. On the addition of Rs.2,65,555/-, the ld. Sr-DR for the…

Shiv Raj Gupta vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi IV

C.A. No.-012044-012044 - 2016Supreme Court22 Jul 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

…mine the question of reasonableness of the expenditure, the test of commercial expediency would have to be adjudged from the point of view of the businessman and not of the Income tax Department.” Further, this Court in Shahzada Nand & Sons v. CIT (1977) 3 SCC 432 reiterated this principle as follows: “4. …But it is well settled that these factors are to be considered from the point of view of a normal, prudent businessman. The reasonableness of the payment with reference to these factors has to be judged not on any subjective standard of the assessing authority but from the point of view of commercia…