Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Bhilwara v. Labour Court, Bhilwara

3 SCC 525Supreme Court of India2009#2504 most cited
46

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Commissioner Nagar Parishad Bhilwara · Labour Court Bhilwara · 3 SCC 525 · Supreme Court 2009 · section 35ABB · telecom licence deduction · section 194H · section 194J · TDS · section 40(a)(ia) · disallowance of expenses · section 147 · section 144 · assessment procedure · section 271B · penalty · section 92CA · transfer pricing · section 80IA

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 144Section 40(a)(ia)Section 194HSection 143(3)Section 194JSection 271BSection 35ABB

Issues it is cited on

section 35abbsection 194hsection 92ca(1)section 43(1)deduction u/s 80iasection 194jsection 144c(1)section 144c(5)directions of the drpsection 271bsection 201section 92ca(3)

Judgments citing Commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Bhilwara v. Labour Court, Bhilwara

Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5145/DEL/2011[2010-11 (F.Y. 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024
For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha (PCIT)
Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 9(1)(vii)

…n identical view in respect of identical issue. 2.8.6. The Id. DR before us placed heavy reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers of India and Others reported in (2020) 3 SCC 525 dated 24/10/2019 to drive home the point that the assessee had erred in accounting the discounted price of sales as its revenue when sim cards are sold to distributors. We have gone through the said decision and we find that the said decision was rendered in the context of determination of Annual Gross Revenue for the purpose of fixing the licence…

Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5143/DEL/2011[2008-09 (F.Y.-2007-08)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vodafone Mobile Assistant Commissioner Services Limited Of Income Tax Circle C-45, 51(1) Okhla Indusrial Area, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Phase Ii, Distt. Centre, New Delhi- 110020 Laxmi Nagar, Pan: Aaacs4457Q New Delhi. Appellant : Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vodafone Mobile Joint Commissioner Of Services Limited Income Tax Circle 51(1) C-45, Aayakar Bhawan, Okhla Indusrial Area, Vs. Distt. Centre, Phase Ii, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi- 110020 New Delhi. Pan: Aaacs4457Q Appellant : Respondent

For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsala Jha (PCIT)
Section 194Section 194HSection 194JSection 9(1)(vii)

…n identical view in respect of identical issue. 2.8.6. The Id. DR before us placed heavy reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers of India and Others reported in (2020) 3 SCC 525 dated 24/10/2019 to drive home the point that the assessee had erred in accounting the discounted price of sales as its revenue when sim cards are sold to distributors. We have gone through the said decision and we find that the said decision was rendered in the context of determination of Annual Gross Revenue for the purpose of fixing the licence…

Vodafone India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(3)(2), Mumbai

Appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6671/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Date
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 32(1)Section 35ASection 40

…n identical view in respect of identical issue. 2.8.6. The ld. DR before us placed heavy reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers of India and Others reported in (2020) 3 SCC 525 dated 24/10/2019 to drive home the point that the assessee had erred in accounting the discounted price of sales as its revenue when sim cards are sold to distributors. We have gone through the said decision and we find that the said decision was rendered in the context of determination of Annual Gross Revenue for the purpose of fixing the licence…

Kool Breweries Limited, Haryana vs. DCIT Cicle-5(2), New Delhi

ITA 4478/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Arun Chhabra, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 292Section 292B

…ITA No.-4478/Del/2019 Carlsberg India Private Limited. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘H’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No:- 4478/Del/2019 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd., Deputy Commissioner of (the amalgamated company, Vs. Income Tax, as Kool Breweries Limited Circle 5(2), stands amalgamated w.e.f. 1st New Delhi April, 2013) PAN No: AAJCS8454J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Arun Chhabra, CA & Ms. Jyoti Yadav, CA Revenue by : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR & Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of He…

Vodafone India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1121/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 3Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “I” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 1121/Mum/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) Vs. DCIT-7(3) Vodafone India Ltd. Peninsula Corporate Park Mumbai. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013. (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 1885/Mum/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) Vs. M/s. Vodafone India Ltd. DCIT-5(2)(1) 5th Floor 10th Floor, Birla Room No. 525 Centurion, Pandurang Aayakar Bhavan Budhkar Marg, Worli M.K. Road Mumbai-400 030. Mumbai-400 020. PAN : AAACZ1849D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ninad Patade Department by S…

Idea Cellular Limited (As Successor to Spice Communications Limited), Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT, Circle- 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3425/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Is Interconnected With Ground No.Ii. Hence, They Are Taken Up Together For Disposal.

Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40Section 40a

…identical view in respect of identical issue. 2.8.6. The ld. DR before us placed heavy reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers of India and Others reported in (2020) 3 SCC 525 dated 24/10/2019 to drive home the point that the assessee had erred in accounting the discounted price of sales as its revenue when sim cards are sold to distributors. We have gone through the said decision and we find that the said decision was rendered in the context of determination of Annual Gross Revenue for the purpose of fixing the licence…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2285/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

…n identical view in respect of identical issue. 2.8.6. The ld.DR before us placed heavy reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers of India and Others reported in (2020) 3 SCC 525 dated 24/10/2019 to drive home the point that the assessee had erred in accounting the discounted price of sales as its revenue when sim cards are sold to distributors. We have gone through the said decision and we find that the said decision was rendered in the context of determination of Annual Gross Revenue for the purpose of fixing the licence…

DCIT 3(2), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2273/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

…n identical view in respect of identical issue. 2.8.6. The ld.DR before us placed heavy reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers of India and Others reported in (2020) 3 SCC 525 dated 24/10/2019 to drive home the point that the assessee had erred in accounting the discounted price of sales as its revenue when sim cards are sold to distributors. We have gone through the said decision and we find that the said decision was rendered in the context of determination of Annual Gross Revenue for the purpose of fixing the licence…

Sri Indudhar vs. Income Tax Officer

ITA/581/2017HC Karnataka13 Sept 2022

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 143(1)Section 260Section 271(1)(c)

…and the ITAT has upheld the said order. 11. The reason shown by the assessee that Assessing Officer had insisted to make certain additions and with the hope that no penalty would be 1 (2009)3 SCC 525 6 imposed, the assessee gave a consent letter, is not acceptable. Hence, no exception can be taken to the orders passed by the CIT(A) and ITAT. 12. Resultantly, this appeal must fail and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE SPS…

Bramhani Industries Limited, Jammalamadugu, Kadapa vs. DCIT, Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 512/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri Chandra Mohan Garga.Y. 2010-11 Bramhani Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Jammalamadugu. Circle-1(3), Pan: Aadcb 1666 M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Bramhani Industries Circle-1(2), Limited, Hyderabad. Jammalamadugu. Pan: Aadcb 1666 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri Gowtham Jain Revenue By Sri K.V. Aravind, Sr. Standing Counsel For Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2022 Order

Section 144Section 234ASection 249(3)Section 68

…entical with the facts of the assessee’s case before us and therefore those decisions cannot be applied to the case of the assessee. The decisions relied by the Ld. DR are as follows: Mela Ram & Sons (29 ITR 607); Commissioner Nagar Parishad vs. Labour Court (3 SCC 525); Asst. Commissioner LTU vs. Glaxo smith Consumer Health Care Ltd (CA No. 2413/2020); Brahampal @ Sammay & Anr vs. National Insurance Company (CA No. 2926/2020); C.N. Nagaraja and Ors. Vs. The Chief Secretary, Zilla Parishad, Bangalore (2001(3) KCCR 1653); B. Bhadragiri Gowda vs. The State of Karnataka and Ors (2007 (2) KCCR 1021; S.R. Vediappan vs…

DCIT, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Bramhani Industries Limited, Jammalamadugu, Ysr Dist.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 398/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri Chandra Mohan Garga.Y. 2010-11 Bramhani Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Jammalamadugu. Circle-1(3), Pan: Aadcb 1666 M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Bramhani Industries Circle-1(2), Limited, Hyderabad. Jammalamadugu. Pan: Aadcb 1666 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri Gowtham Jain Revenue By Sri K.V. Aravind, Sr. Standing Counsel For Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2022 Order

Section 144Section 234ASection 249(3)Section 68

…entical with the facts of the assessee’s case before us and therefore those decisions cannot be applied to the case of the assessee. The decisions relied by the Ld. DR are as follows: Mela Ram & Sons (29 ITR 607); Commissioner Nagar Parishad vs. Labour Court (3 SCC 525); Asst. Commissioner LTU vs. Glaxo smith Consumer Health Care Ltd (CA No. 2413/2020); Brahampal @ Sammay & Anr vs. National Insurance Company (CA No. 2926/2020); C.N. Nagaraja and Ors. Vs. The Chief Secretary, Zilla Parishad, Bangalore (2001(3) KCCR 1653); B. Bhadragiri Gowda vs. The State of Karnataka and Ors (2007 (2) KCCR 1021; S.R. Vediappan vs…

ACIT Circle-7(3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Piramal Enterprises Ltd. (Successor in Interest to Piramal International Pvt Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2338/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 2338/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2010-11) The Asst. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Piramal Enterprises Tax, Circle 7(3)(2), Room No. Ltd. 128A, 1 St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Successor In Interest To M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Piramal International Pvt. फनाभ/ Ltd. 10, Piramal Tower, G.K. Vs. Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aabcp6125D अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshai, Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Ms. Mansi Padhiyar, Ar ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 24.03.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 09.04.2021

For Appellant: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshai, DRFor Respondent: Ms. Mansi Padhiyar, AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…of the Federal Court in Chatturam v CIT39 holding that the jurisdiction to assess and the liability to pay tax are not conditional on the validity of the notice : the liability to pay tax is founded in the charging sections and not in the machinery 38 (1996) 3 SCC 525 39 (1947) 15 ITR 302 (FC)provisions to determine the amount of tax. Reliance was also placed on the decision in Maharaja of Patiala v CIT40 (―Maharaja of Patiala‖). That was a case where two notices were issued after the death of the assessee in his name, requiring him to make a return of income. The notices were served upon the successor Maharaja…

M/S. Churu Trading Company Pvt. Ltd Now Merged With Sprit Textiles Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT 6(2)(1)Present in Charge ACIT Range 8(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5709/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Churu Trading Co. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Private Limited (Now Income Tax, Range-8(2)(2) Merged With Spirit Textiles Aayakar Bhavan, Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai – 400 020 18Th Floor, A-Wing Marathon Futurex N M Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aalcs5905J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Churu Trading Co. Private Income Tax, Range- Limited (Now Merged With Spirit 8(2)(2) Textiles Pvt. Ltd., 18Th Floor, A-Wing Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 020 Marathon Futurex N M Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaacc4853G (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM M/s. Churu Trading Co. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Private Limited (Now Income Tax, Range-8(2)(2) Merged with Spirit Textiles Aayakar Bhavan, Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai – 400 020 18th Floor, A-Wing Marathon Futurex N M Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 PAN/GIR No. AALCS5905J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Churu Trading Co. Private Income Tax, Range- Limited (Now Merged with Spirit 8(2)(2) Textiles Pvt. Ltd., 18th Floor, A-Wing Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 020 Marathon Futurex N M J…

V3S Infratech Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6515/DEL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay KumarFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292BSection 391(2)Section 394

…pect of the matter having regard to the reasons which have weighed us in the earlier part of this judgment. 32. On behalf of the Revenue, reliance has been placed on the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Shillong v Jai Prakash Singh (1996) 3 SCC 525 (“Jai Prakash Singh”). That was a case where the assessee did not file a return for three assessment years and died in the meantime. His son who was one of the legal representatives filed returns upon which the assessing officer issued notices under Section 142 (1) and Section 143 (2). These were complied with and no objections were raised to the a…

V3S Infratech Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6514/DEL/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay KumarFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292BSection 391(2)Section 394

…pect of the matter having regard to the reasons which have weighed us in the earlier part of this judgment. 32. On behalf of the Revenue, reliance has been placed on the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Shillong v Jai Prakash Singh (1996) 3 SCC 525 (“Jai Prakash Singh”). That was a case where the assessee did not file a return for three assessment years and died in the meantime. His son who was one of the legal representatives filed returns upon which the assessing officer issued notices under Section 142 (1) and Section 143 (2). These were complied with and no objections were raised to the a…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited

C.A. No.-005409-005409 - 2019Supreme Court25 Jul 2019

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 92C

…risdiction to assess and the liability to pay tax are not conditional on the validity of the notice : the liability to pay tax is founded in the charging sections and not in the machinery 38 (1996) 3 SCC 525 39 (1947) 15 ITR 302 (FC) 30 provisions to determine the amount of tax. Reliance was also placed on the decision in Maharaja of Patiala v CIT40 (“Maharaja of Patiala”). That was a case where two notices were issued after the death of the assessee in his name, requiring him to make a return of income. The notices were served upon the succe…

Anjan Kumar Naha, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

ITA 2381/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…emicals (2013) 359 ITR 129 which in turn referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v. M. Pirai Choodi (2011) 334 ITR 262 (SC). Mr. Hossain also relied on the decision of the Supreme , Court in CIT, Shillong v. Jai Prakash Singh(l996) 3 SCC 525 where it was held that mere failure to produce a witness for cross-examination would not vitiate the entire assessment proceedings. One more opportunity was given to the Assessee to go before the AO for that purpose. Submissions on behalf of the Assessee 17. Mr. YK. Kapur, learned counsel for the Assessee, on the other hand relied on the passages i…

Anjan Kumar Naha, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

ITA 2380/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…emicals (2013) 359 ITR 129 which in turn referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v. M. Pirai Choodi (2011) 334 ITR 262 (SC). Mr. Hossain also relied on the decision of the Supreme , Court in CIT, Shillong v. Jai Prakash Singh(l996) 3 SCC 525 where it was held that mere failure to produce a witness for cross-examination would not vitiate the entire assessment proceedings. One more opportunity was given to the Assessee to go before the AO for that purpose. Submissions on behalf of the Assessee 17. Mr. YK. Kapur, learned counsel for the Assessee, on the other hand relied on the passages i…

Anjan Kumar Naha, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

ITA 2379/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…emicals (2013) 359 ITR 129 which in turn referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v. M. Pirai Choodi (2011) 334 ITR 262 (SC). Mr. Hossain also relied on the decision of the Supreme , Court in CIT, Shillong v. Jai Prakash Singh(l996) 3 SCC 525 where it was held that mere failure to produce a witness for cross-examination would not vitiate the entire assessment proceedings. One more opportunity was given to the Assessee to go before the AO for that purpose. Submissions on behalf of the Assessee 17. Mr. YK. Kapur, learned counsel for the Assessee, on the other hand relied on the passages i…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-6 vs. Menarini Raunaq Pharma Ltd

ITA/1051/2017HC Delhi11 Sept 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

…answer books to the examinee and at the same time, they owe a duty to the examinee not to disclose the answer-books to anyone else, that is, any third party... “ 52. Reliance has also been placed on Reserve Bank of India vs Jayantilal N. Mistry (2016) 3 SCC 525. 53. It is further submitted that Section 8(3) of the RTI Act provides that exemptions under Section 8(1)(b), (d) to (h) and (j) shall cease to apply once the information pertains to an event that occurred over 20 years before the date of the RTI request. The only continuing exemptions are those under clauses (a), (c), and (i). 54. In the p…