CIT vs. Vasan Publication (P) Ltd 159 ITR 381 (Mad) CIT v. Buhari Sons (P) Ltd.

234 ITR 261High Court1998#20006 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 12AB of the Income Tax ActSection 17 of the Rajasthan Public Trust ActSection 1959Section 1961Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

Issues it is cited on

companydocument

Judgments citing CIT vs. Vasan Publication (P) Ltd 159 ITR 381 (Mad) CIT v. Buhari Sons (P) Ltd.

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Niranjan Koirala, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2253/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.2253/िद"ी/2010(िन.व. 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-31(1), R. No. 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2 Block, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Civic Centre, Jln Marg, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi बनाम Vs. Niranjan Koirala, 27, Akbar Road, New Delhi ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaupk-0483-B Assessee By : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Department By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 23.05.2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 18.02.2010, For Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. This Appeal Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 20.07.2018. Thereafter, The Revenue Filed Miscellaneous Application Seeking Rectification In The Order Of Tribunal On The Ground That The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Vide Application Dated 13.08.2014 Remained To Be Decided. The Tribunal In Ma No. 732/Del/2018 Vide Order Dated 10.07.2023 Recalled The Order

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 54F

…tena of judgements, one of which was pronounced in Smt. Tarulata Shyam Vs. CIT 108 ITR 345 (SC). It is also well settled that there is no room for purposive interpretation under the direct tax laws and in this connection one may advert to the ratios in (1998) 234 ITR 261 (MP) Laxmandas Pranchand Vs. Union of India & Ors.; (1999) 236 /TR 595 (Cal) CIT Vs. Central Concrete & Allied Products Ltd. and (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC) CIT Vs. A.M. H. Ghaswala & Ors. 2.4 The legislative intent behind introduction of section 54F and subsequent amendments has always been to encourage purchase or construction of a new residential ho…

Barminco Indian Underground Mining Services LLP, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-28(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2253/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.2253/िद"ी/2010(िन.व. 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-31(1), R. No. 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2 Block, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Civic Centre, Jln Marg, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi बनाम Vs. Niranjan Koirala, 27, Akbar Road, New Delhi ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaupk-0483-B Assessee By : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Department By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 23.05.2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 18.02.2010, For Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. This Appeal Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 20.07.2018. Thereafter, The Revenue Filed Miscellaneous Application Seeking Rectification In The Order Of Tribunal On The Ground That The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Vide Application Dated 13.08.2014 Remained To Be Decided. The Tribunal In Ma No. 732/Del/2018 Vide Order Dated 10.07.2023 Recalled The Order

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 54F

…tena of judgements, one of which was pronounced in Smt. Tarulata Shyam Vs. CIT 108 ITR 345 (SC). It is also well settled that there is no room for purposive interpretation under the direct tax laws and in this connection one may advert to the ratios in (1998) 234 ITR 261 (MP) Laxmandas Pranchand Vs. Union of India & Ors.; (1999) 236 /TR 595 (Cal) CIT Vs. Central Concrete & Allied Products Ltd. and (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC) CIT Vs. A.M. H. Ghaswala & Ors. 2.4 The legislative intent behind introduction of section 54F and subsequent amendments has always been to encourage purchase or construction of a new residential ho…

Pande Family Charitable Trust, Bajaj Nagar Enclave, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Kailash Heights, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 990/JPR/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam (CIT) ( Th. V.C.)
Section 12A

…jected, the assessee trust will be put to irreparable loss of serving the suffering humanity and allied charitable purposes. 9. That to support above mentioned submissions the assessee inter alia places reliance on the judgment in the case of Laxmandas v UOI 234 ITR 261 wherein it was held, "that where a statutory provision either specifically or by inevitable implication excludes the application of the rules of natural justice, then the court cannot ignore the mandate of the legislature and extend the application of the rules even to the exclude categories". 10. That it is humbly prayer that relief as per I.T.…

Asst CIT 19(1), Mumbai vs. Deepak Kanwarlal Jain, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed in terms of our above order subject to aforesaid verification by Ld

ITA 248/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.248/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Of Deepak Kanwarlal Jain Income Tax-19(1) Flat No.B-6, Rock Side Apartment, बनाम/ Room No.203, 2Nd Floor 116, Walkeshwar Road Vs. Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road Mumbai-400 006 Mumbai-400 007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacpj-2057-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Suchek Anchaliya, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ram Tiwari, Ld. DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)

…the claim of deduction u/s 10AA of the Act. 6.5 Ld. AO relied on following case law in support of his arguments: CIT vs. Vasan Publication (P) Ltd 159 ITR 381 (Mad) CIT vs. Buhari Sons (P) Ltd 144 ITR 12 (Mad) Laxmanda Pranchand & Ors VS. Union of India & Ors 234 ITR 261 (M.P.) CIT vs R.J. Trivadi & Sons, 183 ITR 420 (M.P.) Whereas, the Ld. AR pointed out that the above case laws cite by the Ld. A.O. has been thoroughly discussed by the Hon. ITAT, Jaipur Bench in the case of Goenka Diamond and Jewellery Limited, reported in 146 TTJ 68 and after considering the above case laws, passed the order in favour of the a…

CIT vs. Vasan Publication (P) Ltd 159 ITR 381 (Mad) CIT v. Buhari Sons (P) Ltd. (234 ITR 261) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax