CIT v. Tara Agencies

292 ITR 444Supreme Court of India2007#1422 most cited

What is CIT v. Tara Agencies authority for?

When interpreting fiscal legislation, courts must adhere strictly to the plain and unambiguous language of the statute, without introducing intendment, equity, or words not present in the text, irrespective of perceived hardship. The legislative intent must be gathered solely from what has been said and not said in the statutory language.

80

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Tara Agencies · 292 ITR 444 · Supreme Court · statutory interpretation · fiscal legislation interpretation · plain language rule · no equity in tax law · legislative intent · literal construction · section 115JB · section 14A · section 80JJAA

Also reported as

162 Taxmann 337

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 37(1)Section 14ASection 2(24)(xviii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 80-IESection 80JJAA
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(24)(xviii)section 14a disallowancereal income theorysection 80jjasection 80jjaamat credittrade creditorsweighted deductionprohibited by lawtransfer of capital assetindexed cost of acquisitionincome tax settlement commission

Judgments citing CIT v. Tara Agencies

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 673/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…s to interpret the statute as it is and not by adding or supplying words to it. It is contrary to all rules of construction to read words into statute which the legislature in its wisdom has deliberately not incorporated as held in CIT v. Tara Agencies [2007] 292 ITR 444/162 Taxman 337 (SC). 13.16 The true function of the Court is to interpret the law not to make it. It is well-settled that even if the legislature falls short of the mark, the Court can do nothing more than declare it be thus, giving its reasons, so that the Legislature may take notice and promptly remedy the situation. Reliance can be placed on S…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 485/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…s to interpret the statute as it is and not by adding or supplying words to it. It is contrary to all rules of construction to read words into statute which the legislature in its wisdom has deliberately not incorporated as held in CIT v. Tara Agencies [2007] 292 ITR 444/162 Taxman 337 (SC). 13.16 The true function of the Court is to interpret the law not to make it. It is well-settled that even if the legislature falls short of the mark, the Court can do nothing more than declare it be thus, giving its reasons, so that the Legislature may take notice and promptly remedy the situation. Reliance can be placed on S…

DCIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. Vodafone Essar East Limited, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 482/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…s to interpret the statute as it is and not by adding or supplying words to it. It is contrary to all rules of construction to read words into statute which the legislature in its wisdom has deliberately not incorporated as held in CIT v. Tara Agencies [2007] 292 ITR 444/162 Taxman 337 (SC). 13.16 The true function of the Court is to interpret the law not to make it. It is well-settled that even if the legislature falls short of the mark, the Court can do nothing more than declare it be thus, giving its reasons, so that the Legislature may take notice and promptly remedy the situation. Reliance can be placed on S…

ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 377/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…s to interpret the statute as it is and not by adding or supplying words to it. It is contrary to all rules of construction to read words into statute which the legislature in its wisdom has deliberately not incorporated as held in CIT v. Tara Agencies [2007] 292 ITR 444/162 Taxman 337 (SC). 13.16 The true function of the Court is to interpret the law not to make it. It is well-settled that even if the legislature falls short of the mark, the Court can do nothing more than declare it be thus, giving its reasons, so that the Legislature may take notice and promptly remedy the situation. Reliance can be placed on S…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT, Range - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 357/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…s to interpret the statute as it is and not by adding or supplying words to it. It is contrary to all rules of construction to read words into statute which the legislature in its wisdom has deliberately not incorporated as held in CIT v. Tara Agencies [2007] 292 ITR 444/162 Taxman 337 (SC). 13.16 The true function of the Court is to interpret the law not to make it. It is well-settled that even if the legislature falls short of the mark, the Court can do nothing more than declare it be thus, giving its reasons, so that the Legislature may take notice and promptly remedy the situation. Reliance can be placed on S…

M/S. Vodafone Essar East Ltd., Kolkata vs. JCIT, Range - 7, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 356/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…s to interpret the statute as it is and not by adding or supplying words to it. It is contrary to all rules of construction to read words into statute which the legislature in its wisdom has deliberately not incorporated as held in CIT v. Tara Agencies [2007] 292 ITR 444/162 Taxman 337 (SC). 13.16 The true function of the Court is to interpret the law not to make it. It is well-settled that even if the legislature falls short of the mark, the Court can do nothing more than declare it be thus, giving its reasons, so that the Legislature may take notice and promptly remedy the situation. Reliance can be placed on S…

ACIT, Circle - 7, Kolkata vs. Hutchison Telecom East Limited, Kolkata

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 343/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…s to interpret the statute as it is and not by adding or supplying words to it. It is contrary to all rules of construction to read words into statute which the legislature in its wisdom has deliberately not incorporated as held in CIT v. Tara Agencies [2007] 292 ITR 444/162 Taxman 337 (SC). 13.16 The true function of the Court is to interpret the law not to make it. It is well-settled that even if the legislature falls short of the mark, the Court can do nothing more than declare it be thus, giving its reasons, so that the Legislature may take notice and promptly remedy the situation. Reliance can be placed on S…

Virendra Kumar Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 4 to 7 are partly allowed

ITA 2721/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishivirendra Kumar Gupta, Acit, Vs. Prop Sanjay Metal Udyog, Circle-39(1), 3858, Gali Barna, Sadar Bazar, Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaapg4216E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Aashish Chadha, CAFor Respondent: Shri SS Rana, CIT DR
Section 148

…before the ld CIT(A). 13. The ld CIT DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities, relying on the following judicial pronouncement:- a. PCIT Vs. Paramount Communication (P) Ltd 2017-TIOL-253-H.C –IT) b. PCIT Vs. Paramount Communication (P) Ltd 292 ITR 444 c. CIT Vs. Arun Malhotra 363 ITR 195 d. NK Proteins Vs. CIT 2017-TIOL-23-HC–IT) Virendra Kumar Gupta Vs. ACIT, e. Vijay Proteins Ltd Vs. ACIt 58 ITD 428 (Ahmadabad) f. CIT Vs. La Medica 117 Taxmann 628 ( Delhi) 14. The various decisions cited by the ld CIT DR as well as the contention of the assessee before the lower authorities were considered.…

Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Dehradun

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2506/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 5856/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 4277/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 5744/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2506/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy/Assistant Commissioner C/O Luthra & Luthra Law Offices, Of Income Tax, Circle-2, 103, Ashoka Estate, Barakhamba Dehradun, Uttranchal Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci1797A Assessee By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra Jain & Sh. Alok Kumar Jain, Cas Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2007- 08 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Ii, Dehradun & The Other Appeals Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 09.02.2012, 20.12.2011 & 30.11.2012 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Dehradun For The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Respectively. 2. Since The Issue Involved Is Common In All These Appeals Which Were Heard Together So These Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra JainFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 2Section 234BSection 80Section 80I

…of “Computer Software” in Sections 10A, 10B and 80HHE of the Act does not mean that the same definition applies to Section 80IC of the Act also. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Tara Agencies reported in 292 ITR 444 wherein while interpreting the statutes it has been mentioned as under: “The intention of the Legislature has to be gathered from the language used in the statue, which means that attention should be paid to what has been said as also what has not been said” (pg 464)…….. “It is the bounden duty of the court to interpret the statue as it is. It is…

Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Dehradun

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5856/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 5856/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 4277/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 5744/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 2506/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Imsi India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy/Assistant Commissioner C/O Luthra & Luthra Law Offices, Of Income Tax, Circle-2, 103, Ashoka Estate, Barakhamba Dehradun, Uttranchal Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci1797A Assessee By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra Jain & Sh. Alok Kumar Jain, Cas Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2007- 08 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 03.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Ii, Dehradun & The Other Appeals Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 09.02.2012, 20.12.2011 & 30.11.2012 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Dehradun For The Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Respectively. 2. Since The Issue Involved Is Common In All These Appeals Which Were Heard Together So These Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Sh. Sudhindra JainFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 2Section 234BSection 80Section 80I

…of “Computer Software” in Sections 10A, 10B and 80HHE of the Act does not mean that the same definition applies to Section 80IC of the Act also. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Tara Agencies reported in 292 ITR 444 wherein while interpreting the statutes it has been mentioned as under: “The intention of the Legislature has to be gathered from the language used in the statue, which means that attention should be paid to what has been said as also what has not been said” (pg 464)…….. “It is the bounden duty of the court to interpret the statue as it is. It is…

M/S. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd., Neyveli vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 2200/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Aug 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Mrs.Ruby George, CIT
Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद!य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2161, 2162 & 2163/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s.Neyveli Lignite – Tax, Corporation Ltd., Large Taxpayer Unit-II, Block 1 – Corporate Office, Chennai. Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. [PAN: AAACN 1121 C ] (अपीलाथ&/Appellant) ('(यथ&/Res…

M/S. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd., Neyveli vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 2199/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Mrs.Ruby George, CIT
Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद!य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2161, 2162 & 2163/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s.Neyveli Lignite – Tax, Corporation Ltd., Large Taxpayer Unit-II, Block 1 – Corporate Office, Chennai. Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. [PAN: AAACN 1121 C ] (अपीलाथ&/Appellant) ('(यथ&/Res…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd., Neyveli

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 2163/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Aug 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Mrs.Ruby George, CIT
Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद!य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2161, 2162 & 2163/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s.Neyveli Lignite – Tax, Corporation Ltd., Large Taxpayer Unit-II, Block 1 – Corporate Office, Chennai. Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. [PAN: AAACN 1121 C ] (अपीलाथ&/Appellant) ('(यथ&/Res…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd., Neyveli

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 2162/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Mrs.Ruby George, CIT
Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद!य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2161, 2162 & 2163/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s.Neyveli Lignite – Tax, Corporation Ltd., Large Taxpayer Unit-II, Block 1 – Corporate Office, Chennai. Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. [PAN: AAACN 1121 C ] (अपीलाथ&/Appellant) ('(यथ&/Res…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd., Neyveli

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 2161/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan RamabadranFor Respondent: Mrs.Ruby George, CIT
Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद!य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2161, 2162 & 2163/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s.Neyveli Lignite – Tax, Corporation Ltd., Large Taxpayer Unit-II, Block 1 – Corporate Office, Chennai. Neyveli Township, Cuddalore District, Neyveli – 607 801. [PAN: AAACN 1121 C ] (अपीलाथ&/Appellant) ('(यथ&/Res…

DCIT, Circle-3, Kolkata, Darjeeling vs. Narendra Tea Company (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1517/KOL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10A

…r on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in law in allowing exemption u/s. 10A of the I. T. Act, 1961, to the assessee for blending of tea which, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision in CIT Vs. Tara Agencies (2007) 292 ITR 444 (SC), has categorically ruled to be only ‘processing’ and not amounting to ‘production’ manufacture. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in law in importing the scope of the term ‘manufacture’ from the SEZ Act, 2005, being an enactment subsequent to section 10A of the I. T. Act, 1961, regardl…

Biswajit Das, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 493/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 10Section 10BSection 2

…and the exemption available to 100% EOU u/s 10B of the Act are very similar in nature and the wordings of the statutory provisions are similar in nature. Hon'ble Kerala High Court also considered the judgment in the decision of Supreme Court in Tara Agencies (292 ITR 444 (SC) relied upon by the Sr. Standing Counsel for the revenue, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court clearly held that blending of tea does not amount to 'manufacture' or 'production' of an article or thing, but is only processing. Hon'ble High Court allowing the appeal of the assessee held that the assessee was exclusively engaged in blending and packing…

ITO, Ward-2(2), Bhubaneswar vs. Biswajit Das, Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 473/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 10Section 10BSection 2

…and the exemption available to 100% EOU u/s 10B of the Act are very similar in nature and the wordings of the statutory provisions are similar in nature. Hon'ble Kerala High Court also considered the judgment in the decision of Supreme Court in Tara Agencies (292 ITR 444 (SC) relied upon by the Sr. Standing Counsel for the revenue, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court clearly held that blending of tea does not amount to 'manufacture' or 'production' of an article or thing, but is only processing. Hon'ble High Court allowing the appeal of the assessee held that the assessee was exclusively engaged in blending and packing…

DDIT, Dehradun vs. Cgg Marine Resources Norge, Gurgaon

In the result ground No. 13 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed with above direction

ITA 1493/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Anuj Arora, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv
Section 44BSection 44DSection 9

…44BB of the Act. 61. It is also a settled law that the court cannot add words to statute or read words into it which are not there vide UOI v. Delhi Nandan Aggarwal [1962] 1 SCC 323. The similar view has been reiterated recently in CIT v. Tara Agenence [2007] 292 ITR 444/162 Taxman 337 (SC). This being so we are of the view there is no restriction as suggested by the ld DR cannot be read into section 44BB, to exclude the assessee from it. 62. Now when we look into the facts of the case in the light of the discussion above we find that assessee is in the business of supplying plant/ship on hire which is being used…

A.C.I.T Cir - 36, Kolkata. vs. M/S Sri Ram Commercial Co, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 623/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…quent of the passage of the assessment order u/s.143(3) 10.03.2005 the matter of blending of tea was examined by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its judgement passed on 09.07.2007 in the case of CIT vs. Tara Agencies (292 ITR 444) held that tea blending will not amount to manufacturing. Therefore, the AO on the date of reopening had clear cut information of the correct state of law as derived from the judgements of both the jurisdictional High Court as well as the Apex Court. Under these circumstances, a taxpayer cannot be allowed to take advantage of an oversight or mist…