CIT v. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad)

242 ITR 691High Court#3459 most cited

What is CIT v. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad) authority for?

A wrong decision, even if followed in earlier years, cannot be perpetuated on the basis of the principle of consistency if it contravenes the correct law and facts.

34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Seshasayee Industries Ltd · 242 ITR 691 · principle of consistency · wrong decision · correct law · tax matters

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 22Section 255(4)Section 28(i)Section 10AASection 10DSection 144C(5)

Issues it is cited on

section 3asection 10(20a)section 13(2)(c)section 10(20)section 288asection 13(1)(c)(ii)advancement of general public utilitysection 13(8)section 140asection 28(i)revision under section 263section 13(2)

Judgments citing CIT v. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad)

State Bank of India, Bangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ward-3(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessees are

ITA 1602/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Smt R. Premi. JCITFor Respondent: 28.11.2019
Section 10(5)Section 133(6)Section 201(1)

…proceedings. The appellant’s claim for applying the :- 6 -: ITA Nos.1578 to 1581/Bang/2019 & 1602 to 1604/Bang/2019 principle of consistency is also not sustainable in light of the following judicial decisions: i) In CIT vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad) 242 ITR 691, the Madras High Court held that the fact its claim was not questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law should not be applied during the current A.Y. ii) In Indian Vaccines Corporation Ltd. vs. ITO 2010-TIOL-587 ITAT Del and in Jat Education Society vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del) 10 taxmann.com 127, it was held that a…

M/S. State Bank of India, Jayanagar vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ward- 3(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessees are

ITA 1581/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Smt R. Premi. JCITFor Respondent: 28.11.2019
Section 10(5)Section 133(6)Section 201(1)

…proceedings. The appellant’s claim for applying the :- 6 -: ITA Nos.1578 to 1581/Bang/2019 & 1602 to 1604/Bang/2019 principle of consistency is also not sustainable in light of the following judicial decisions: i) In CIT vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad) 242 ITR 691, the Madras High Court held that the fact its claim was not questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law should not be applied during the current A.Y. ii) In Indian Vaccines Corporation Ltd. vs. ITO 2010-TIOL-587 ITAT Del and in Jat Education Society vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del) 10 taxmann.com 127, it was held that a…

M/S. State Bank of India, Jayanagar vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ward- 3(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessees are

ITA 1580/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Smt R. Premi. JCITFor Respondent: 28.11.2019
Section 10(5)Section 133(6)Section 201(1)

…proceedings. The appellant’s claim for applying the :- 6 -: ITA Nos.1578 to 1581/Bang/2019 & 1602 to 1604/Bang/2019 principle of consistency is also not sustainable in light of the following judicial decisions: i) In CIT vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad) 242 ITR 691, the Madras High Court held that the fact its claim was not questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law should not be applied during the current A.Y. ii) In Indian Vaccines Corporation Ltd. vs. ITO 2010-TIOL-587 ITAT Del and in Jat Education Society vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del) 10 taxmann.com 127, it was held that a…

M/S. State Bank of India, Rajajinagar vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ward- 3(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessees are

ITA 1579/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Smt R. Premi. JCITFor Respondent: 28.11.2019
Section 10(5)Section 133(6)Section 201(1)

…proceedings. The appellant’s claim for applying the :- 6 -: ITA Nos.1578 to 1581/Bang/2019 & 1602 to 1604/Bang/2019 principle of consistency is also not sustainable in light of the following judicial decisions: i) In CIT vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad) 242 ITR 691, the Madras High Court held that the fact its claim was not questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law should not be applied during the current A.Y. ii) In Indian Vaccines Corporation Ltd. vs. ITO 2010-TIOL-587 ITAT Del and in Jat Education Society vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del) 10 taxmann.com 127, it was held that a…

M/S. State Bank of India, Nagadevanahalli vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ward- 3(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessees are

ITA 1578/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Smt R. Premi. JCITFor Respondent: 28.11.2019
Section 10(5)Section 133(6)Section 201(1)

…proceedings. The appellant’s claim for applying the :- 6 -: ITA Nos.1578 to 1581/Bang/2019 & 1602 to 1604/Bang/2019 principle of consistency is also not sustainable in light of the following judicial decisions: i) In CIT vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad) 242 ITR 691, the Madras High Court held that the fact its claim was not questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law should not be applied during the current A.Y. ii) In Indian Vaccines Corporation Ltd. vs. ITO 2010-TIOL-587 ITAT Del and in Jat Education Society vs. DCIT (ITAT, Del) 10 taxmann.com 127, it was held that a…

M/S. Surendranagar District Co-Op. Milk Producers Union Ltd., Surendranagar vs. The DCIT, Surendranagr Circle, Surendranagar

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 262/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.262-263/Rjt/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) बनाम/ M/S.Surendranagar District D.C.I.T, Co-Op. Milk Producers Surendranagar Circle, Vs. Union Ltd. Surendranagar. Wadhwan City, Surendranagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaas8375B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitender Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 17/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Of Even Dated 12/01/2018, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 26/03/2015 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Ys) 20012-13 & 2013-14. Ita Nos.262-263/Rjt/2018 A.Y.S 2012-13 To 2013-14 First, We Take Up Ita No. 262/Rjt/2018 For A.Y. 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Kumar, DR
Section 194JSection 36Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 48Section 80P(2)(b)Section 80P(2)(d)

…Limited & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. (SC) 282 ITR 273. (b) The fact that its claim was not questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law should not be applied during the A.Y. - CIT Vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad.) 242 ITR 691. (c) To perpetuate an error is not heroism - The doctrine of stare decisis should not deter the Court from overruling an earlier decision, if it is satisfied that such decision is manifestly wrong or proceeds upon a mistaken assumption in regard to the existence or continuance of a statutory provision or is contrary to another decision of the cou…

The ITO, Ward-2(2), Jamnagar vs. Smt. Shitalben Saurabh Vora, Jamnagar

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 651/RJT/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Sept 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.262-263/Rjt/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) बनाम/ M/S.Surendranagar District D.C.I.T, Co-Op. Milk Producers Surendranagar Circle, Vs. Union Ltd. Surendranagar. Wadhwan City, Surendranagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaas8375B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitender Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 17/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Of Even Dated 12/01/2018, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 26/03/2015 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Ys) 20012-13 & 2013-14. Ita Nos.262-263/Rjt/2018 A.Y.S 2012-13 To 2013-14 First, We Take Up Ita No. 262/Rjt/2018 For A.Y. 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Kumar, DR
Section 194JSection 36Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 48Section 80P(2)(b)Section 80P(2)(d)

…Limited & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. (SC) 282 ITR 273. (b) The fact that its claim was not questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law should not be applied during the A.Y. - CIT Vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad.) 242 ITR 691. (c) To perpetuate an error is not heroism - The doctrine of stare decisis should not deter the Court from overruling an earlier decision, if it is satisfied that such decision is manifestly wrong or proceeds upon a mistaken assumption in regard to the existence or continuance of a statutory provision or is contrary to another decision of the cou…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Thermax Engg. Const. Co. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 477/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R.D. OnkarFor Respondent: Shri Samrat Rahi
Section 251

…esent case as in that case the contract did not contain provision for liquidated damages and had only dealt with the case where the matter was to be referred to Arbitration. He further submitted that the facts in the case of CIT Vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd.(242 ITR 691) are distinguishable and therefore not applicable to the present facts of the Assessee. He thereafter submitted that the expenditure has been incurred during the course of business and is for the purpose of business more so when CIT(A) has accepted the allowability of claim of liquidated damages as business expenditure. He further submitted that…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Thermax Engg. Const. Co. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 476/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R.D. OnkarFor Respondent: Shri Samrat Rahi
Section 251

…esent case as in that case the contract did not contain provision for liquidated damages and had only dealt with the case where the matter was to be referred to Arbitration. He further submitted that the facts in the case of CIT Vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd.(242 ITR 691) are distinguishable and therefore not applicable to the present facts of the Assessee. He thereafter submitted that the expenditure has been incurred during the course of business and is for the purpose of business more so when CIT(A) has accepted the allowability of claim of liquidated damages as business expenditure. He further submitted that…

Apne Aap Women Worlwide (India) Trust, Kolkatta vs. ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 7373/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7373/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) Apne Aap Women Worldwide (India) Trust Income Tax Officer (Exemption)-1(1) बनाम/ 1, Sashitala Road, Kidderpore Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Kolkata-700 023 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aaata-8473-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Ld.Dr : Shashi Tulsiyan, Ld. Ar Assessee By सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 09/07/2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/10/2018 Date Of Pronouncement

For Respondent: Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Ld.DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…observations were made by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co Ltd Vs CIT(SC) 49 ITR 137, and Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd & Anr.Vs Union of India & Ors (SC) 282 ITR 273. Further in the case of CIT Vs Seshasayee Industries Ltd (Madras) 242 ITR 691, It was held by the Hon’ble Madras High Court that the fact that if claim was questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law would not be applied during the course of assessment year. Further it is noted that there is a legal issue involved regarding non-availability of exemption u/s. 11 on account of violation…

Powerloom Developement & Export Promotion Council, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 2(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1185/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.Manjunatha, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S. Powerloom Development & Ito (Exemption)-2(2), 4Th Floor, Export Promotion Council, C/O Piramal Chambers, Lal Baug, बिधम/ Shankar Lal Jain & Associates, Mumbai. Vs. 12, Engineer Building, 265, Princess Street, Mumbai 400 002. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaatp0271E (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri. S.L Jain , A.RFor Respondent: Shri. Rajat Mittal, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 25

…n Council Vs. ITO(E)-2(2) – A.Y. 2012-13 5 assessment year is a separate proceedings, as also affirmed in the decision of the Apex court in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs. Union of India (S.C) 282 ITR. In another case of CIT Vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. (Mad) 242 ITR 691, it was further held that the fact that its claim was not questioned in earlier year does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law should not be applied during the current A.Y. and in the case of Ace Investments (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (Mad) 244 ITR 166 it was held that facts can be reconsidered in later year and record different finding for ear…

The Fine Arts Society, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are party allowed

ITA 189/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2171/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…[118 ITR 243]. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CWT vs. Meattles (p) Ltd. 156 ITR 569 has held that the revenue authorities cannot be stopped from taking a view of statutory provisions in the later year In another case or CIT Vs Seshasayee Industries Ld. (Mad) 242 ITR 691, it was further held that the fact that its claim was not questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law should not be applied during the current A.Y. and in the case of Ace Investments (P) Ltd Vs. CIT (Mad) 244 ITR 166 'it was held that facts can be reconsidered in later year and record different finding - Find…

The Fine Arts Society, Mumbai vs. Dy Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) - 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are party allowed

ITA 2171/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2171/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…[118 ITR 243]. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CWT vs. Meattles (p) Ltd. 156 ITR 569 has held that the revenue authorities cannot be stopped from taking a view of statutory provisions in the later year In another case or CIT Vs Seshasayee Industries Ld. (Mad) 242 ITR 691, it was further held that the fact that its claim was not questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law should not be applied during the current A.Y. and in the case of Ace Investments (P) Ltd Vs. CIT (Mad) 244 ITR 166 'it was held that facts can be reconsidered in later year and record different finding - Find…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd

ITA - 346 / 2009HC Delhi29 Nov 2010
Section 37(1)

…ome Tax [37 ITR 66 (SC)]; (ii) Shri Sajjan Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [156 ITR 585 (SC)]; (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lachhman Das Mathura Das [124 ITR 411(All)], (iv) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Seshasayee Industries Ltd. [242 ITR 691 (Mad)]. 10. Mr. Ajay Vohra, learned counsel appearing for the assessee, countered the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the Revenue. He supported the decision of the Tribunal by articulating his submission with finesse, in the following manner: 1) There was a consistent and regular method accounting followed by the assess…