CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd.

M/S Shankar Rice & General Mills, Moga vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle, Moga

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

…not apply to the assessment of that year, even if the assessment is actually made after the amendment came into force. Reliance in this regard is also placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs M/s Vatika Township Private Limited [367 ITR 466] wherein it has been held that it is a settled law lhal any amendment which increases the tax burden of the assessee has to be considered prospective and not retrospective. Also, the legislations which modify accrued rights or which impose obligations or which impose new duties or attach a new disability have to be treated as prospective unless t…

Dinesh Infrastructure Private Limited, Jodhpur vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

…astructure Pvt. Ltd. The appellant has contended that CPC has erred in charging late fees amounting to Rs. 38,200/- U/s. 234E. In support of his contention, he has quoted various decisions such as Hon'ble SC decision in CIT vs. Vatika Township Pvt Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 466 (SC). He also quoted Hon'ble Karnataka High Court Writ Appeal Nos.2663-2674/2015(T-IT) & Ors in Sri Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors. He also contended that it is a mistake apparent on liable to be rectified in light of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hirday Narain (L) VITO (1970) 78 ITR 26 (SC)]. The appellant als…

Dinesh Infrastrurcture Private Limited, Jodhpur vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

…astructure Pvt. Ltd. The appellant has contended that CPC has erred in charging late fees amounting to Rs. 38,200/- U/s. 234E. In support of his contention, he has quoted various decisions such as Hon'ble SC decision in CIT vs. Vatika Township Pvt Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 466 (SC). He also quoted Hon'ble Karnataka High Court Writ Appeal Nos.2663-2674/2015(T-IT) & Ors in Sri Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors. He also contended that it is a mistake apparent on liable to be rectified in light of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hirday Narain (L) VITO (1970) 78 ITR 26 (SC)]. The appellant als…

M/s Durga Granites vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

…g reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Manish Kumar Vs. Union of India & Another reported (2021) 5 SCC 1 and Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I, New Delhi Vs. Vatika Township Private Limited reported in (2015) 1 SCC 1 submits that the creation of an artificial definition of ‘mining area’ is liable to be struck down on the ground that it is vague and ambiguous and in the event of such ambiguity, it must be resolved in favour of the citizen. Moreover, taxing statutes must receive strict construction which are not to be extended by implication beyond the clear i…

Mr Gaurav Ajmera, Ratlam vs. DCIT Central Circle -2, Indore

Accordingly. Thus, this ground is allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Mr. Gaurav Ajmera, Dcit, बनाम/ 38, Ram Mohalla, Central Circle 2, Ratlam Indore. Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aglpa8863C Assessee By Shri Pawan Ved, Advocate & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 01.09.2023

…ndment not relating to the rates, could only be applied to the assessments of that financial year and not of the previous year. Reliance is placed on the Constitution Bench decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.I.T Vs. Vatika Township Private Ltd. (2015) 1 SCC 1. The learned Counsel would also place before us a number of decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kesoram Industries v. Commissioner of Wealth Tax, [AIR 1966 SC 1385], Guffic Chem P. Ltd v. C.I.T [2011(4) SCC 245], C.I.T v. Sarkar Builders [(2015) 375 ITR 392 (SC)], Shiv Raj Gupta v. C.I.T [(2020) 425 ITR 420(SC)] and State of Kerala v. Alex Geor…