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 366,339 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.

Mahaveer Kumar Jain, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 418/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2018-19 Anand Kumar Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. Katrapati & Income Tax, Associates, Central Circle – 3(3), 1-1-298/2/B3, 1St Floor, Hyderabad. Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 020 Pan : Aecpj1189F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year – 2018-19 Pramod Kumar Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. Katrapati & Income Tax, Associates, Central Circle – 3(3), 1-1-298/2/B3, 1St Floor, Hyderabad. Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 020 Pan : Aetpj7173G (Appellant) (Respondent) Asseesment Year – 2018-19 Mahaveer Kumar Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. Katrapati & Income Tax, Associates, Central Circle – 3(3), 1-1-298/2/B3, 1St Floor, Hyderabad. Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 020 Pan : Aecpj1184J Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad Revenue By: Sri Rohit Mujumdar. Date Of Hearing: 25/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2021 Per S. S. Godara, J.M.

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Sri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 132BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 158BSection 234Section 234B

…132B Explanation 2 of the Act. We accordingly hold that the learned lower authorities have erred in law in invoking section 154 jurisdiction in the very terms as per strict interpretation of principles invoked in Commissioner of Customs Vs. Dilip Kumar (2018) 9 SCC 11 (SC) (FB). We thus accept the assessee’s instant lead appeal in 416/Hyd/2021 in case of the first and foremost assessee Shri Ashok Kumar Jain. Same order should follow in the remaining twin cases ITA Nos.417 and 418/Hyd/2021 raising the very issue involving varying sums. A copy of this common order be placed in respective case files. 5. These three…

Pramod Kumar Jain, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 417/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2018-19 Anand Kumar Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. Katrapati & Income Tax, Associates, Central Circle – 3(3), 1-1-298/2/B3, 1St Floor, Hyderabad. Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 020 Pan : Aecpj1189F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year – 2018-19 Pramod Kumar Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. Katrapati & Income Tax, Associates, Central Circle – 3(3), 1-1-298/2/B3, 1St Floor, Hyderabad. Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 020 Pan : Aetpj7173G (Appellant) (Respondent) Asseesment Year – 2018-19 Mahaveer Kumar Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. Katrapati & Income Tax, Associates, Central Circle – 3(3), 1-1-298/2/B3, 1St Floor, Hyderabad. Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 020 Pan : Aecpj1184J Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad Revenue By: Sri Rohit Mujumdar. Date Of Hearing: 25/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2021 Per S. S. Godara, J.M.

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Sri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 132BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 158BSection 234Section 234B

…132B Explanation 2 of the Act. We accordingly hold that the learned lower authorities have erred in law in invoking section 154 jurisdiction in the very terms as per strict interpretation of principles invoked in Commissioner of Customs Vs. Dilip Kumar (2018) 9 SCC 11 (SC) (FB). We thus accept the assessee’s instant lead appeal in 416/Hyd/2021 in case of the first and foremost assessee Shri Ashok Kumar Jain. Same order should follow in the remaining twin cases ITA Nos.417 and 418/Hyd/2021 raising the very issue involving varying sums. A copy of this common order be placed in respective case files. 5. These three…

Anand Kumar Jain, Hyderabad vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 416/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2018-19 Anand Kumar Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. Katrapati & Income Tax, Associates, Central Circle – 3(3), 1-1-298/2/B3, 1St Floor, Hyderabad. Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 020 Pan : Aecpj1189F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year – 2018-19 Pramod Kumar Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. Katrapati & Income Tax, Associates, Central Circle – 3(3), 1-1-298/2/B3, 1St Floor, Hyderabad. Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 020 Pan : Aetpj7173G (Appellant) (Respondent) Asseesment Year – 2018-19 Mahaveer Kumar Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of C/O. Katrapati & Income Tax, Associates, Central Circle – 3(3), 1-1-298/2/B3, 1St Floor, Hyderabad. Ashok Nagar, Hyderabad – 500 020 Pan : Aecpj1184J Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad Revenue By: Sri Rohit Mujumdar. Date Of Hearing: 25/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2021 Per S. S. Godara, J.M.

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Sri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 132BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 158BSection 234Section 234B

…132B Explanation 2 of the Act. We accordingly hold that the learned lower authorities have erred in law in invoking section 154 jurisdiction in the very terms as per strict interpretation of principles invoked in Commissioner of Customs Vs. Dilip Kumar (2018) 9 SCC 11 (SC) (FB). We thus accept the assessee’s instant lead appeal in 416/Hyd/2021 in case of the first and foremost assessee Shri Ashok Kumar Jain. Same order should follow in the remaining twin cases ITA Nos.417 and 418/Hyd/2021 raising the very issue involving varying sums. A copy of this common order be placed in respective case files. 5. These three…

Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1424/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Jun 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2016-17 Telangana State Power Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Generation Corporation Income-Tax, Ltd., Hyderabad. Circle – 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aafct 0257Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri M. Chandramouleswara Rao Revenue By: Shri Yvst Sai Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 17/03/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 14 /06/2021 O R D E R Per L.P. Sahu, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee For Ay 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Cit(A) - 2, Hyderabad’S Order, Dated 21/08/2019 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ; In Short “The Act”.

For Appellant: Shri M. Chandramouleswara RaoFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32A

…of the 16 I.T.A. No. 1424/Hyd/2019 Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Ltd., Hyd. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N C Budharaja and Co., [1993] 204 ITR 412 (SC) and Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v. Dilip Kumar & Co. and Ors: (2018) 95 Taxmann.com 327 (SC). 6.1. In the rejoinder the AR of the assessee submitted that the case laws relied by the Ld CIT Dr. is not applicable in the present facts of the case. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has decided that the electricity is “goods” then there is no room for further discussion that the assessee is not entitled for Investment Allowance as per U/…

Sonodyne International Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 10(3), Kolkata [Now DCIT, Circle - 10(2), Kolkata]

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2516/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sonodyne International Pvt. Ltd…………...........…………..………………………………..….…….......Appellant 98 N B Block New Alipore Kolkata – 700 053 [Pan : Aadcs 7562 F] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(3), Kolkata.………………………………….…………..…..............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharta Pratim Datta, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sital Chandra Das, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 28Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 5Th , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 4, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 23/10/2017, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Is A Company & Is A Manufacturer/Exporter Of Power Supplies, Inverters, Audio Equipments. The Sole Issue That Arises For My Consideration, Was Whether The Assessing Officer Was Right In Rejecting The Claim Of The Assessee For Adjudication U/S 35(2Ab)(1) Of The Act, As The Assessee Failed To Produce Original Copies Of Duly Approved Form 3Ck, 3Cl & 3Cm, From The Department Of Scientific & Industrial Research (Dsir). 3. After Hearing Rival Contentions, I Hold As Follows:- In The Submissions Made By The Assessee It Is Stated As Follows:- “The Petitioner'S Submission In The Line Of The Original Submission Made At The Assessment Stage Is That The Assessee Has Been Running Its In-House Research Activities

Section 250Section 35

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sonodyne International Pvt. Ltd…………...........…………..………………………………..….…….......Appellant 98 N B Block New Alipore Kolkata – 700 053 [PAN : AADCS 7562 F] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(3), Kolkata.………………………………….…………..…..............Respondent Appearances by: Shri Siddharta Pratim Datta, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Sital Chandra Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : August 28th, 2018 Date of prono…