Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co.

95 Taxmann.com 327Supreme Court of India2018#931 most cited

What is Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co. authority for?

Exemption provisions and notifications must be interpreted strictly, and the burden of proving applicability lies with the assessee. If there is an ambiguity in an exemption clause, its benefit cannot be claimed by the assessee and must be interpreted in favour of the Revenue.

114

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co. · 95 Taxmann.com 327 · strict interpretation exemption · exemption notification · burden of proof assessee · ambiguity favouring revenue · Section 11 · Section 80P · tax exemption interpretation · benefit of doubt revenue

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co.

NTT MANAGED SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1165/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.1165/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2023-2024 Ntt Managed Services India Private Limited, The Dcit, Vs. Hyderabad. Telangana. Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. Pin 500 081 Pan Aarcs7517G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By -None- राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Sri Mathivanan Sa, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04.03.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

For Respondent: Sri Mathivanan SA, Sr. AR
Section 108(8)Section 143(1)Section 80J

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA.No.1165/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2023-2024 NTT Managed Services India Private Limited, The DCIT, vs. Hyderabad. Telangana. Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. PIN 500 081 PAN AARCS7517G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee by -None- राज" व "ारा/Revenue by : Sri Mathivanan SA, Sr. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 02.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04.03.2026 आदेश/ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT :…

ROHILKHAND EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 181/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.181 & 182/Lkw/2024 A.Ys.2017-18 & 2018-19 Rohilkhand Educational Vs. Dcit, Charitable Trust, Bareilly Central Circle, Bareilly Pan: Aaatr6902J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assesseeby: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. S.H. Usmani, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: [ These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Lucknow Dated 19.03.2024 & 22.03.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For The A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19, Dismissing The Appeals Of The Assessee Against Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “(1).That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Not Considering The Fact That In The Alleged Assessment Order, The Columns Of Name Of Assessee, Pan, Asst Year, Date Of Assessment & Section Under Which Passed, Are Blank. (2)That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Treating The Demand As Valid Which Was Not Computed On The Basis Of Orderthat May Not Be Termed To Be An Order Under Section 143(3). (3) That A Demand Of Tax As Computed In The Computation Sheet Is Without Jurisdiction Void-Ab-Inito & Is Liable To Be Annulled. (4) That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 736591857/-Comprising  Corpus Donation Aggregating To Rs 7,68,95,000/-, A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80G(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW ‘B’ BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.181 & 182/LKW/2024 A.Ys.2017-18 & 2018-19 Rohilkhand Educational vs. DCIT, Charitable Trust, Bareilly Central Circle, Bareilly PAN: AAATR6902J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assesseeby: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue by: Sh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR Date of hearing: 14.08.2025 Date of pronouncement: 22.09.2025 O R D E R PER BENCH: [ These two appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A)-3, Lucknow dated 19.03.2024 and 2…

Showing 120 of 114 · Page 1 of 6

Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co. (95 Taxmann.com 327) — Cited in 114 Judgments | BharatTax