Commissioner of Income Tax v. Leader Valves Ltd.

295 ITR 273High Court2007#3269 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Leader Valves Ltd. authority for?

The case is cited for the proposition that certain tax matters have been decided similarly in various High Court decisions, including Commissioner of Income Tax v. Leader Valves Ltd., indicating a consistent legal view on the subject.

36

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Leader Valves Ltd. · 295 ITR 273 · High Court decisions · tax law · assessment proceedings · legal precedent · CIT v. Lalludas Children Trust · DIT v. Lovely Bal Shikha Parishad · DIT v. Guru Nanak Vidhya Bhandar Trust

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271A(1)(d)

Issues it is cited on

section 4(3)section 205section 36(1)(v)section 10(23c)(iv)advancement of general public utilitysection 52proviso to section 2(15)mliput to usesection 10(34)section 10(23c)section 2(15)

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Leader Valves Ltd.

The Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jalandhar vs. M/S. Mbd. Printographics P.Ltd, Jalandhar

In the result, all the appeals of department and that of assessee stand dismissed

ITA 506/ASR/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 80I

…the earlier years and, therefore, when on an issue, a particular claim has been settled one way or the other, then the consistency has to be maintained as per the binding judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Leader Valves Ltd. reported in 295 ITR 273 P & H (HC) and Berger Paint 266 ITR 99 Apex Court. 46 I.T.A. No. 506/Asr/2011 and others 36. In view of the above factual matrix and Judicial pronouncement, we find no merit in the argument of the department, and that the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80IC is hereby held to be legally justified and therefore, all the appeals of the de…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar vs. M/S. Mbd Printographics P.Ltd., Jalandhar

In the result, all the appeals of department and that of assessee stand dismissed

ITA 27/ASR/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 80I

…the earlier years and, therefore, when on an issue, a particular claim has been settled one way or the other, then the consistency has to be maintained as per the binding judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Leader Valves Ltd. reported in 295 ITR 273 P & H (HC) and Berger Paint 266 ITR 99 Apex Court. 46 I.T.A. No. 506/Asr/2011 and others 36. In view of the above factual matrix and Judicial pronouncement, we find no merit in the argument of the department, and that the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80IC is hereby held to be legally justified and therefore, all the appeals of the de…

Sh.Baljit Singh Bachal, Ambala vs. ITO, W-1, Amabal

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 12/CHANDI/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.12/Chd/2020 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2012-13 Sh. Baljit Singh Bachal, बनाम The Ito, Vpo-Panjokhera Sahib, Ward-1, Ambala 134011 Ambala "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Banpb3278H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing Through Video Conferencing "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Smt. Meenahkshi Vohra, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04.05.2021 उदघोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30. 07.2021 आदेश/Order Perr.L. Negi:

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Meenahkshi Vohra, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…accordingly submitted that the action of the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Berger Paints India vs. CIT 266 ITR99 (SC) and the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Leader Valves Ltd. 295 ITR 273 (P&H). The Ld. counsel further placing reliance on the order passed by the SMC Bench of the Chandigarh Bench in the case of Smt. Amarjit Kaur vs. ITO ITA No 40 &41/Chd/2019 dated 14.06.2019 submitted that since the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order ignoring the principle of consistency, the same is liable to be set aside. In view of the af…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 30/CHANDI/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…CIT [2004] 266 ITR 99 (SC) ] c) DCIT V/s United Vanaspati Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 124 (AT)(TM) d) Radhasoami Satsang Vs. CIT[1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC e) CIT V/s Arthus Andersen & Co. [2009] 318 ITR 229 (Bom) f) Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Leader Valves Ltd [2007] 295 ITR 273 (P&H) 2. Intervention into matters of commercial expediency by the Learned A.O. 2.1 Notwithstanding the Appellant's contention that the Learned AO's impugned action to disallow the payments made to interested persons was not supported by the provisions of the Act, we wish to highlight the judiciary's view on limiting the scope of authority give…

M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…CIT [2004] 266 ITR 99 (SC) ] c) DCIT V/s United Vanaspati Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 124 (AT)(TM) d) Radhasoami Satsang Vs. CIT[1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC e) CIT V/s Arthus Andersen & Co. [2009] 318 ITR 229 (Bom) f) Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Leader Valves Ltd [2007] 295 ITR 273 (P&H) 2. Intervention into matters of commercial expediency by the Learned A.O. 2.1 Notwithstanding the Appellant's contention that the Learned AO's impugned action to disallow the payments made to interested persons was not supported by the provisions of the Act, we wish to highlight the judiciary's view on limiting the scope of authority give…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 29/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…CIT [2004] 266 ITR 99 (SC) ] c) DCIT V/s United Vanaspati Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 124 (AT)(TM) d) Radhasoami Satsang Vs. CIT[1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC e) CIT V/s Arthus Andersen & Co. [2009] 318 ITR 229 (Bom) f) Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Leader Valves Ltd [2007] 295 ITR 273 (P&H) 2. Intervention into matters of commercial expediency by the Learned A.O. 2.1 Notwithstanding the Appellant's contention that the Learned AO's impugned action to disallow the payments made to interested persons was not supported by the provisions of the Act, we wish to highlight the judiciary's view on limiting the scope of authority give…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 28/CHANDI/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…CIT [2004] 266 ITR 99 (SC) ] c) DCIT V/s United Vanaspati Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 124 (AT)(TM) d) Radhasoami Satsang Vs. CIT[1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC e) CIT V/s Arthus Andersen & Co. [2009] 318 ITR 229 (Bom) f) Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Leader Valves Ltd [2007] 295 ITR 273 (P&H) 2. Intervention into matters of commercial expediency by the Learned A.O. 2.1 Notwithstanding the Appellant's contention that the Learned AO's impugned action to disallow the payments made to interested persons was not supported by the provisions of the Act, we wish to highlight the judiciary's view on limiting the scope of authority give…

DCIT, Circle-1(Exemption), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal School( Manav Mangal Society), Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 27/CHANDI/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…CIT [2004] 266 ITR 99 (SC) ] c) DCIT V/s United Vanaspati Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 124 (AT)(TM) d) Radhasoami Satsang Vs. CIT[1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC e) CIT V/s Arthus Andersen & Co. [2009] 318 ITR 229 (Bom) f) Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Leader Valves Ltd [2007] 295 ITR 273 (P&H) 2. Intervention into matters of commercial expediency by the Learned A.O. 2.1 Notwithstanding the Appellant's contention that the Learned AO's impugned action to disallow the payments made to interested persons was not supported by the provisions of the Act, we wish to highlight the judiciary's view on limiting the scope of authority give…

M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 2/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…CIT [2004] 266 ITR 99 (SC) ] c) DCIT V/s United Vanaspati Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 124 (AT)(TM) d) Radhasoami Satsang Vs. CIT[1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC e) CIT V/s Arthus Andersen & Co. [2009] 318 ITR 229 (Bom) f) Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Leader Valves Ltd [2007] 295 ITR 273 (P&H) 2. Intervention into matters of commercial expediency by the Learned A.O. 2.1 Notwithstanding the Appellant's contention that the Learned AO's impugned action to disallow the payments made to interested persons was not supported by the provisions of the Act, we wish to highlight the judiciary's view on limiting the scope of authority give…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 137/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…CIT [2004] 266 ITR 99 (SC) ] c) DCIT V/s United Vanaspati Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 124 (AT)(TM) d) Radhasoami Satsang Vs. CIT[1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC e) CIT V/s Arthus Andersen & Co. [2009] 318 ITR 229 (Bom) f) Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Leader Valves Ltd [2007] 295 ITR 273 (P&H) 2. Intervention into matters of commercial expediency by the Learned A.O. 2.1 Notwithstanding the Appellant's contention that the Learned AO's impugned action to disallow the payments made to interested persons was not supported by the provisions of the Act, we wish to highlight the judiciary's view on limiting the scope of authority give…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 136/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…CIT [2004] 266 ITR 99 (SC) ] c) DCIT V/s United Vanaspati Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 124 (AT)(TM) d) Radhasoami Satsang Vs. CIT[1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC e) CIT V/s Arthus Andersen & Co. [2009] 318 ITR 229 (Bom) f) Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Leader Valves Ltd [2007] 295 ITR 273 (P&H) 2. Intervention into matters of commercial expediency by the Learned A.O. 2.1 Notwithstanding the Appellant's contention that the Learned AO's impugned action to disallow the payments made to interested persons was not supported by the provisions of the Act, we wish to highlight the judiciary's view on limiting the scope of authority give…

Baldev Singh S/O Gajjan Singh, Tarn Taran vs. The Income Tax Officer, Tarn Taran

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 178/ASR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 178/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. T. S. Aurora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 110Section 143(3)Section 69A

…accepting agricultural income at Rs.80,500, i.e., as disclosed for that year. The principal of consistency would therefore preclude the addition for the current year, and for which reliance was placed by him on the decision in CIT v. Leader Balls Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 273 (P&H) and CIT v. Lagan Kala Upvan [2003] 259 ITR 489 (Del). The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), Sh. Charan Dass, would submit that the cash deposits for AY 2009-10 were to the tune of Rs.29.75 lacs only, while that for the current year are admittedly at an aggregate of Rs.109.25 lacs; the two situations are clearly not comparable. 4. I hav…

DCIT 25(1), Mumbai vs. Nipun I Thakkar, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and issue raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3076/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Mahaveer Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar, D.R
Section 254Section 33(4)Section 69C

…00/- u/s 69C of the Act. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in ignoring the submission of the appellant, as was held by Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Leaders Valves (P.) Ltd [(2007) 295 ITR 273], that where consumption is not doubted addition on account of purchases cannot be made. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition u/s 69C of the Act in ignoring the law laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Enterprises (P.) Ltd [(2013) 2…

M/S.Vascular Concepts Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT-Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1927/BANG/2016[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jan 2018AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 234ASection 37

….1921 to 1927/Bang/2016 Page 31 of 41 accounted all credit notes issued by the assessee as against the total customer base of 600 plus hospital. In support of his contentions, reliance was placed upon the judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Leader Valves Ltd., 295 ITR 273 (P&H) and the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Southern Motors v. State of Karnataka and Ors, in Civil Appeal Nos.10972 – 10978 of 2016 dated 18.01.2017. He also placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of IFB Industries Ltd., Vs. State of Kerala, copy of which is placed at page No. 878-887 of…

M/S.Vascular Concepts Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT-Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1926/BANG/2016[2021-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jan 2018AY 2021-2013

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 234ASection 37

….1921 to 1927/Bang/2016 Page 31 of 41 accounted all credit notes issued by the assessee as against the total customer base of 600 plus hospital. In support of his contentions, reliance was placed upon the judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Leader Valves Ltd., 295 ITR 273 (P&H) and the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Southern Motors v. State of Karnataka and Ors, in Civil Appeal Nos.10972 – 10978 of 2016 dated 18.01.2017. He also placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of IFB Industries Ltd., Vs. State of Kerala, copy of which is placed at page No. 878-887 of…

DCIT vs. M/S M.N. Dastur & Company

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and

ITA 94/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Jason P Boazthe Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-12(1), Bangalore. . Appellant Vs. M/S Mn Dastur & Co. Pvt. Ltd., 7Th Floor, Raheja Towers, 26/27, Mg Road, Bangalore-560 001. . Respondent Aabcm2136M.

For Appellant: Shri BK Manjunath, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, JCIT
Section 26(1)(iv)

…with or deviate from the finding of the learned CIT(A) for the assessment year under consideration i.e 2007-08. 10. For the aforesaid view, we are fortified by the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT Vs. Leader Valves Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 273, wherein it has been held as under: “that keeping in view the principle of consistency, the Revenue could not be permitted to raise an issue in isolation only for one year in the case of one assessee, while accepting the findings on the same issue in the case of other assessees and for the other years in the case of the assesssee. 11. In the pr…