CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd.

367 ITR 466Supreme Court of India2014#25 most cited

What is CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Taxing statutes are presumed to operate prospectively unless a clear contrary intention for retrospective application is evident. The law applicable for determining tax liability is that which stands on the first day of the assessment year, following the principle that law looks forward, not backward (lex prospicit non respicit).

1,558

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 383,853 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. · 367 ITR 466 · retrospective amendment · prospective operation · interpretation of taxing statutes · tax law applicability · lex prospicit non respicit · assessment year · law looks forward · section 143(1)

Also reported as

1 SCC 1109 DTR 33271 CTR 1

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115BBESection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 69Section 200A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

retrospective amendmentsection 43bsection 43section 115section 139section 11undisclosed incomesection 143(1)section 132section 13previous yearsection 15

Judgments citing CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd.

Pawan Kumar, Fatehabad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Fatehabad

ITA 1112/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE/HYBRID MODE/VIRTUAL MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 463 /Chd/ 2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Ajay Kumar बनाम The ITO 341, Matana, Fatehabad, Ward-1, Haryana-125050 Fatehabad "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AYJPK1793R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansa…

Sh. Amardeep Singh Athwal, Yamunanagar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Yamunanagar

ITA 566/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE/HYBRID MODE/VIRTUAL MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 463 /Chd/ 2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Ajay Kumar बनाम The ITO 341, Matana, Fatehabad, Ward-1, Haryana-125050 Fatehabad "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AYJPK1793R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansa…

Sh. Amardeep Singh Athwal, Yamunanagar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Yamunanagar

ITA 565/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE/HYBRID MODE/VIRTUAL MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 463 /Chd/ 2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Ajay Kumar बनाम The ITO 341, Matana, Fatehabad, Ward-1, Haryana-125050 Fatehabad "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AYJPK1793R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansa…

Saroj Chaudhary Bala, Panchkula vs. ITO, Ward-4, Panchkula

ITA 635/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE/HYBRID MODE/VIRTUAL MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 463 /Chd/ 2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Ajay Kumar बनाम The ITO 341, Matana, Fatehabad, Ward-1, Haryana-125050 Fatehabad "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AYJPK1793R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansa…

Smt. Shankri Devi, Panchkula vs. ACIT, Panckula Circle, Panchkula

ITA 596/CHANDI/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE/HYBRID MODE/VIRTUAL MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 463 /Chd/ 2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Ajay Kumar बनाम The ITO 341, Matana, Fatehabad, Ward-1, Haryana-125050 Fatehabad "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AYJPK1793R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansa…

M/S. Rukmini Educational Charitable Trust, Bengaluru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Bengaluru

ITA 2108/BANG/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Vijaya Mehta, CA & Shri Avinash Mallya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Srinandini Das CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 12Section 12ASection 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…ve been inserted with effect from 1 April 2022 and therefore there could not be applied for the period prior to the assessment year 2022 – 23. He relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of CIT versus vertical townships private limited 367 ITR 466. He further stated that assessee has relied upon the 8 decisions during the course of the hearing and he stated that all the decisions of the coordinate benches have held that those provisions could not be applied prior to 14 2022. He further referred to another decision of Sri Srinivasa Educational and Charitable Trust v DCIT for AY 2021 – 22 in…

ACIT, Mumbai vs. K Raheja Corporate Services Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 5350/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…ct has been made effective from 01.04.2022 and therefore did not apply in the relevant AYs under consideration. Relying on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MM Aqua Technologies Ltd Vs CIT (436 ITR 582)&CIT Vs Vatika Township Pvt Ltd (367 ITR 466), wherein it has been held that any legislation which imposes new obligation or new duties or a new levy shall have to be necessarily treated as prospective in nature. 38. We have heard both the parties. Firstly, we deem it fit to deal with the CBDT Circular No.5/2014 relied upon by the Revenue. It is by now well settled in law that any Rule or C…

ACIT, Mumbai vs. K Raheja Corporate Services Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 5349/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, SR DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…ct has been made effective from 01.04.2022 and therefore did not apply in the relevant AYs under consideration. Relying on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MM Aqua Technologies Ltd Vs CIT (436 ITR 582)&CIT Vs Vatika Township Pvt Ltd (367 ITR 466), wherein it has been held that any legislation which imposes new obligation or new duties or a new levy shall have to be necessarily treated as prospective in nature. 38. We have heard both the parties. Firstly, we deem it fit to deal with the CBDT Circular No.5/2014 relied upon by the Revenue. It is by now well settled in law that any Rule or C…

Shri Chintamani Parshwanath Shwetambar Murtipujak Jain Sangh, Mumbai vs. Exem. Ward 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5038/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri J. Kala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Virbhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(2)(a)Section 11(3)Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(1)

…ments will take effect from 1st April, 2023 and will accordingly apply in relation to the assessment year 2023-24 and subsequent assessment years, [Clauses 4 and 5]" 19. We find the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC) on the issue of interpretation of taxing statutes about retrospective amendment and prospective amendment, has held as under: "30. A legislation, be it a statutory Act or a statutory Rule or a statutory Notification, may physically consists of words printed on papers. However, conceptually it is a great deal more than an ordinary prose. Ther…

M/S Sushila Devi Centre for Professional Studies and Research, Dehradun vs. PCIT (Central), Kanpur (Jao- Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Dehradun)

ITA 131/DDN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 12Section 127Section 127(2)(a)Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)

…Charitable Society v. PCIT, Central, ITA No. 1803/DEL/2024 at Page Nos. 156-187, Paragraphs 21 & 22 of the Case Law Compilation. 12. By the rule of strict construction and by the presumption against retrospectivity affirmed in CIT v. Vatika Township (P) Ltd (367 ITR 466, SC), such a provision cannot be applied to assessment years prior to its coming into force. Retrospective application of "specified violation" to AYs 2014-15 to 2021-22 amounts to legislative overreach by the executive, something impermissible in law. 13. Without prejudice, the power to cancel the registration has been introduced by Finance Act,…

National Engineering Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 5(1), Kolkata

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 982/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 14ASection 250

…Guarantee are not covered within the definition of international transaction. It is submitted that applying 'doctrine of fairness' as explained by the Supreme Court of India in the case CIT v. Vatika Township (P.) Ltd. [2014] 49 taxmann.com 249/227 Taxman 121/367 ITR 466 the explanation ought to be read as prospective in its application and retrospective in its effect such that it will also cover within its ambit guarantees issued prior to the introduction of the Explanation by Finance Act, 2012. [Para 70] A new Enactment or an Amendment meant to explain the earlier Act has to be considered retrospective. The Ex…

Ramesh Jaisinghani, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -5(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 980/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 50(2)(ec)Section 55(2)(aa)Section 55(2)(ac)Section 55(2)(as)Section 56(2)(ac)

…which for the first time created a legal fiction for computing cost in such cases, was substantive in nature and could not be given retrospective effect. He relied heavily upon the dictum of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC), which laid down that a provision which imposes a new obligation or creates a new charge must operate prospectively unless the legislative intent for retrospective operation is clearly expressed. The presumption of prospectivity, he submitted, is particularly strong in fiscal legislation, where taxpayers plan their affairs based on the law a…

Deputy Commissioner, Mumbai vs. Gaurav Investments, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5053/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Prabhash Shankardeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Room No.656, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai - 400020 ............... Appellant V/S Gaurav Investments, 1St Floor, B & C Block, Tradelink, E-Wing, ……………… Respondent Kamala Mill Compounds, Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400023 Pan: Aadfg0064D

For Appellant: Shri Kshitiji Kasi ViswanathFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 43C

…as held to be applicable retrospectively. In such scenario, we place reliance on the doctrine enshrined in the judgment of the full bench decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Vatika Township (P) Ltd. [2014] 49 taxmann.com 249/227 Taxman 121/367 ITR 466 . The fact in this case was that search and seizure u/s 132 was conducted on 10-2-2001 pursuant to which the 8 assessment order for the block period from 1-4-1989 to 10-22000 was passed on 28-02-2002 at a total undisclosed income of Rs. 85,00,000/-. The tax was charged as prescribed in section 113 of the Act. Subsequently, a proviso was inserted…

DCIT 42 1 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Satyendra Kumar Triloknath Goyal, Mumbai

ITA 4421/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Section 250Section 43CSection 66Section 68Section 69C

…as held to be applicable retrospectively. In such scenario, we place reliance on the doctrine enshrined in the judgment of the full bench decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Vatika Township (P) Ltd. [2014] 49 taxmann.com 249/227 Taxman 121/367 ITR 466. The fact in this case was that search and seizure u/s 132 was conducted on 10-2-2001 pursuant to which the assessment order for the block period from 1-4- 1989 to 10-2-2000 was passed on 28-02-2002 at a total undisclosed income of Rs.85,00,000/-. The tax was charged as prescribed in section 113 of the Act. Subsequently, a proviso was inserted u/…

DCIT, Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Aia Engineering Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas, the

ITA 565/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta1. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 – Asst.Year 2014-15 2. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.351/Ahd/2025 – Asst. Year 2014-15 1. The Dcit Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad – 380 015 बनाम / V/S. 2. Aia Engineering Ltd. 115, Gvmm Estate Odhav Road, Odhav Ahmedabad - 382 415 1. Aia Engineering Ltd. 115, Gvmm Estate Odhav Road, Odhav Ahmedabad – 382 415 2. The Dcit Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabca 2777 J (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 01/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Cross-Appeals, One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Preferred Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)'] Dated 13/01/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act') For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-2015. Both The Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. First, We Take Up Revenue'S Appeal In Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 For Ay 2014-15 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 2(17)Section 250

…placed on the following: ➤ Sedeo Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 310 (SC) ➤ M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT-[2021) 436 ITR 582 (SC) ➤ PCIT v. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. (2022) 448 ITR 674 (Delhi) ➤ CIT v. Vatika Township (P.) Ltd. 367 ITR 466 (SC) • Explanation 3 to S.37(1) was specifically inserted in statute book by Finance Act, 2022 to bring the violation of "laws outside India" within the purview of S.37(1) and overcome the judgements of Tribunals taking a view that S.37(1) do not cover "laws outside India". This clearly amounts to widening the existing law which can only be appli…

Aia Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas, the

ITA 351/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta1. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 – Asst.Year 2014-15 2. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.351/Ahd/2025 – Asst. Year 2014-15 1. The Dcit Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad – 380 015 बनाम / V/S. 2. Aia Engineering Ltd. 115, Gvmm Estate Odhav Road, Odhav Ahmedabad - 382 415 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabca 2777 J (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 01/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Cross-Appeals, One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Preferred Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)'] Dated 13/01/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act') For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-2015. Both The Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. First, We Take Up Revenue'S Appeal In Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 For Ay 2014-15 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 2(17)Section 250

…ance is placed on the following: Sedeo Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 310 (SC) M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT-[2021) 436 ITR 582 (SC) PCIT v. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. (2022) 448 ITR 674 (Delhi) CIT v. Vatika Township (P.) Ltd. 367 ITR 466 (SC) • Explanation 3 to S.37(1) was specifically inserted in statute book by Finance Act, 2022 to bring the violation of "laws outside India" within the purview of S.37(1) and overcome the judgements of Tribunals taking a view that S.37(1) do not cover "laws outside India". This clearly amounts to widening the existing law which can only be appli…

Ais Shivaji Memorial Societys Employees Coop Credit Society, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 207/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Deepak S. SasarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…rts of the taxing machinery and both must be considered together to determine the tax liability. 12. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that the amended provisions cannot be applied retrospectively: 6 CIT vs. Vatika Township (P) Ltd., (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC) (ii) P. Ram Gopal Varma vs. DCIT (2013) 357 ITR 493 (AP) Allamaprabhu VUSS Niyamit Kalloli vs. ITO vide ITA No.063/PAN/2025, (iii) order dated 04.04.2025 13. He accordingly submitted that order of the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A) being not in accordance with law should be reversed and the grounds raised by the assessee be allowed. 14. The Ld. DR on…

DCIT, Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Arvind Fashions Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 758/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Narendra Prasad Sinhaita Nos. 757 & 758/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-D.R
Section 111Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 144Section 14A

…t take any any rights which had legally vested in the assessees." I.T.A Nos. 757& 758/Ahd/2025 Arvind Fashions Ltd., A.Y. 2017-18 & 2018-19 Further, reliance is also placed on ratio of CIT v. Vatika Township (P) Ltd. [2014] 49 taxmann.com 249/227 Taxman 121/367 ITR 466 (SC). When the provisions is clear and the intention of the legislature of apparent and loud that the provision was always to be read as if it applied even if no exempt income was earned during that year. Even ratio of case law supports the position. It may please be noted that the 2022 amendment has been clarificatory. The Vatika Township(supra…

DCIT, Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Arvind Fashions Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 757/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Narendra Prasad Sinhaita Nos. 757 & 758/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-D.R
Section 111Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 144Section 14A

…t take any any rights which had legally vested in the assessees." I.T.A Nos. 757& 758/Ahd/2025 Arvind Fashions Ltd., A.Y. 2017-18 & 2018-19 Further, reliance is also placed on ratio of CIT v. Vatika Township (P) Ltd. [2014] 49 taxmann.com 249/227 Taxman 121/367 ITR 466 (SC). When the provisions is clear and the intention of the legislature of apparent and loud that the provision was always to be read as if it applied even if no exempt income was earned during that year. Even ratio of case law supports the position. It may please be noted that the 2022 amendment has been clarificatory. The Vatika Township(supra…

The Bombay Society of the Franciscan Clarist Sisters of the Most Blessed Sacrament, Mumbai vs. ITO Exem Ward 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2501/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No.2501/Mum/2025 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2023-2024) The Bombay Society Of V/S. Income Tax Officer, The Franciscan Clarist बिाम Ward 2(4), Mumbai Sisters Of The Most 6Th Floor, Mtnl Tel. Ex. Blessed Sacrament Building, Cumballa Hills, St. Anthony’S Home For The Pedder Road, Mumbai Aged, 51, Chapel Road, 400026 Bandra (West), Mumbai 400050 स्थायी लेखा सुं./जीआइआर सुं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatt0738Q Appellant/अपीलाथी .. Respondent/प्रधिवादी धििााररिी की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Prashant Ghumare, Adv. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. Dr (Virtually Present) स िवाई की िारीख / Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Renu Jauhri [A.M.] :- This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Addl/Jcit (A)-2 Delhi, [Cit(A)] Dated 28.02.2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Act”] For Assessment Year 2023-2024. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds In This Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Ghumare, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 115BSection 12ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

…ment years. "Clauses 4 and 5+" P a g e | 13 ITA No 2501/MUM/2025 A.Y.2023-24 Bombay Society of the Franciscan Clarist Sisters of the most Blessed Sacranment, Mumbai 19. We find the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CTT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC) on the issue of interpretation of taxing statutues about retrospective amendment and prospective amendment, has held as under: "30. A legislation, be it a statutory Act or a statutory Rule or a statutory Notification, may physically consists of words printed on papers. However, conceptually it is a great deal more than an ordinary prose. The…