CIT v. Vatika Township (P.) Ltd.

49 Taxmann.com 249Supreme Court of India2014#266 most cited

What is CIT v. Vatika Township (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Legislation is ordinarily presumed not to have retrospective operation, especially for taxing statutes unless explicitly stated or when intended to remove hardship for the assessee. The decision clarifies the principles for determining whether an amendment to a taxing statute applies prospectively or retrospectively, distinguishing between clarificatory and substantive amendments.

294

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Vatika Township · Vatika Township P Ltd · retrospective application · prospective application · taxing statute amendment · Section 113 proviso · Section 115BBE · clarificatory amendment · substantive amendment · undue hardship · Income-tax Act 1961 · search assessment surcharge

Also reported as

227 Taxmann 121314 ITR 338

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Vatika Township (P.) Ltd.

Sri Mookambika Infosolutions Pvt Ltd, Madurai, Tamil Nadu vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 94/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Balakrishnan (Director) & ShriFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा"" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA Nos.94 & 95/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Mookambika Infosolutions Pvt Ltd. ADIT बनाम/ 31, IIIrd Floor, Town Hall Road, Centralized Processing Center Vs. Madurai – 625 001. Bengaluru – 560 500 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAOCS-3451-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appella…

M/S Sree Lakshmi Venkateswara Spinning Mills (P) Ltd., Palladam vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 37/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yeshwanth Kumar (CA) -Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा"" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No. 37/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sree Lakshmi Venkateswara Spinning Mills (P) Ltd बनाम DCIT S.F.No. 2, Karadivavi, Centralized Processing Center / Palladam – 641 664. Vs. Bengaluru – 560 500 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AACCS-7041-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant by : S…