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.

M/S Associated Mining Company vs. State of Karnataka

WP/31144/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

M/S B Ashwathnarayana Singh & Co vs. State of Karnataka

WP/15782/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

H.G.Rangangoud vs. State of Karnataka

WP/31147/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

M/S Milan Minerals Pvt Ltd vs. The State of Karnataka

WP/863/2009HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

M/S Kariganur Mineral Mining Industry vs. State of Karnataka

WP/15991/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

M/S.V S Lad & Sons vs. State of Karnataka

WP/17002/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

Smt K M Parvathamma vs. State of Karnataka

WP/16144/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

M/S.Hind Traders vs. The State of Karnataka

WP/31185/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

Sri H G Rangangoud vs. State of Karnataka

WP/17001/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

M/S Nadeem Minerals vs. State of Karnataka & Others

WP/31149/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

M/S Kanhaiyalal Dudheria vs. State of Karnataka

WP/31233/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

M/S Lakshminarayana Mining Company vs. State of Karnataka

WP/15431/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

M/S Garudadhri Impex Pvt. Ltd vs. State of Karnataka

WP/39190/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

M/S Canara Minerals Private Limited vs. State of Karnataka

WP/13803/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

Bellary Mining Corporation Ltd vs. State of Karnataka

WP/60230/2009HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…radation of forest on account of non-forest activities such as mining and extraction of minerals, the tax is being levied for the purpose of afforestation. In this regard, reference was also made to T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India, [(2006) 1 SCC 1], wherein, Net Present Value (NPV) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) have been constituted for the purpose of afforestation and such other objects consequent upon mining and quarrying operations in forest areas. Therefore, learned Advocate General sought to justify levy of the tax on the basis of…

CIT vs. J. H. Finvest Pvt. Ltd

ITA/28/2015HC Delhi30 Nov 2015

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…e Court to effectuate an illegal transaction, the Courts will refuse assistance. Supreme Court in S.P Chengalvaraya Naidu Vs. CS(COMM) No.28/2015 & CS(COMM) No.27/2015 Page 16 of 22 Jagannath (1994) 1 SCC 1 also cautioned against allowing the process of the Court being used inter alia by tax evaders. 28. I am therefore of the view that it is not open to the defendant to before this Court contend that the monies which the defendant in its books of accounts and balance sheet has shown as loan from the plaintiff and repayable to the plaintiff (and o…

CIT vs. J. H. Finvest Pvt. Ltd

ITA/27/2015HC Delhi30 Nov 2015

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…e Court to effectuate an illegal transaction, the Courts will refuse assistance. Supreme Court in S.P Chengalvaraya Naidu Vs. CS(COMM) No.28/2015 & CS(COMM) No.27/2015 Page 16 of 22 Jagannath (1994) 1 SCC 1 also cautioned against allowing the process of the Court being used inter alia by tax evaders. 28. I am therefore of the view that it is not open to the defendant to before this Court contend that the monies which the defendant in its books of accounts and balance sheet has shown as loan from the plaintiff and repayable to the plaintiff (and o…

Uco Bank, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 6, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the asssesse in ITA No

ITA 1768/KOL/2009[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2015AY 2002-2003

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri D.S Damle, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri S.Srivastava, CIT, ld.DR
Section 115JSection 254Section 29Section 36(1)(viia)

…ed’ used in Explanation 3 to section 115JB should not be construed as clarificatory in nature and thereby giving retrospective effect. Reliance in this regard was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vatika Township case reported in 367 ITR 466 (SC). n. The levy of MAT on banking companies is a substantive levy on the assessee and hence can only be prospective. o. Reliance was placed on the following decisions in support of all the contentions of the assessee on the impugned issue :- ITA No.1768/Kol/2009-C-AM 4 U C O BANK * State Bank of Hyderabad vs DCIT reported in (2013) 33 taxmann…

M/S Khazana Merchandise Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. C.I.T - II, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1825/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm Assessment Year:2008-09 M/S Khazana Mercahandise Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata-Ii, 2A, G.C.Avenue, Commerce Aayakarbhawan, House, 7Th Floor, Room No.3, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700013. Kolkata – 700 069. Pan : Aadck 2111 J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S.Srivastava, CIT DRFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 282Section 68

…his section in correct perspective. This objection, therefore, fails. 7. The second objection of the ld. AR was that the proviso to section 68 cannot be considered as retrospective in view of several judgments including CIT VS. Vatika Township P. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC), in which the levy of surcharge on income tax in case of block assessment has been held as prospective. We do not find any substance in the argument for two reasons. First reason is that this judgment does not deal with proviso to section 68 but with the levy of surcharge on income (supra). Relevant discussion has been made in paras 13.u.…

M/S Auroplas Gold Pvt Ltd (Formerly Known As M/S - Ranisati Dealcomm Pvt Ltd), Kolkata vs. C.I.T Kolkata - II, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1488/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm Assessment Year 2008-09 M/S. Auroplas Gold Pvt. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd.,(Formerly Known As M/S. Kolkata-Ii, Ranisati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd.) C/O Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., Aayakarbhawan, 7, C.R.Avenue, Kolkata- P-7, Chowringhee Square, 700072. Kolkata – 700 069. Pan: Aaecr 0440 C Assessment Year 2008-09 Sheetal City Realtors Pvt. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., C/O Poddar & Kolkata-Ii, Aayakarbhawan, Associates, 9/12, Lalbazar Street, ‘Mercantile Building; P-7, Chowringhee Square, 1St Floor, Block-D, Kolkata- Kolkata – 700 069. 700001. Pan: Aabce 8664 L Assessment Year 2009-10 M/S. Subhdhan Commodities Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., C/O, Salarpuria Kolkata-Iii, Jajodia & Co., 7, Chittaranjan Avenue, 1

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…81/Kol/14 & ITA No. 171/Kol/15 making a proper and adequate inquiry. 10. The next objection of the ld. AR was that the proviso to section 68 cannot be considered as retrospective in view of several judgments including CIT VS. Vatika Township P. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC), in which the levy of surcharge on income tax in case of block assessment has been held as prospective. We do not find any substance in the argument for two reasons. First reason is that this judgment does not deal with proviso to section 68 but with the levy of surcharge on income (supra). Relevant discussion has been made in paras 13.u.…