What is CWS (India) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

When interpreting tax statutes, courts should favor constructions that result in equity over literal meanings that are unjust. Such interpretations should avoid unfair, irrational, or unreasonable outcomes.

How many judgments cite CWS (India) Ltd. v. CIT?

33 judgments on BharatTax cite CWS (India) Ltd. v. CIT (208 ITR 649), spanning 2009 to 2025.

CWS (India) Ltd. v. CIT (208 ITR 649)

M/s.V.R.Farms Pvt Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are dismissed

ITTA/272/2008HC Telangana28 Nov 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

…ITA Nos. 402/2005 & Others Page No.1 of 44 * THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on 06.02.2009 + ITA 402/2005 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX … Appellant - versus – M/S JINDAL EXPORTS LIMITED ... Respondent WITH + ITA 1474/2006 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX … Appellant - versus – M/S NESTLE INDIA LIMITED ... Respondent AND + ITA 708/2007 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX … Appellant - versus – BRIJBASI ART PRESS LIMITED ... Respondent WITH + ITA 719/2007 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX … Appe…

RAJESH AMARSINH PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 94/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR

Section 1Section 120(3)(a)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 274

…would create an unfair, irrational or unreasonable result should be avoided and statutory provision salvaged by giving enacted section a subdued and subordinate content:- 80 ITR 57(Ker.) 156 ITR 323 (SC) 179 ITR 580 (Cal.) 175 ITR 384 (Ail) 200 ITR 697 (Bom.) 208 ITR 649 (SC)” Mere unsubstantiated explanation would not absolve assesses, burden is on him to prove has been held 208 ITR 668 (Bom.) & 185 ITR 49 (SC). In the circumstances, I agree with the AO that the appellant has failed to explain the credit entries of Rs.54,52,835/- appearing the bank accounts. The cash deposited has remained unexplained. Therefore…

ACC LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ACIT - LTU, MUMBAI

ITA 417/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. ACC Limited v. Addl. CIT -Range 1(1) (Formerly known as The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. ACC Limited v. Asst. CIT-LTU (Formerly known as The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT – LTU v. M/s. ACC Limited 28th Floor, Centre-…

ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5692/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. ACC Limited v. Addl. CIT -Range 1(1) (Formerly known as The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. ACC Limited v. Asst. CIT-LTU (Formerly known as The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT – LTU v. M/s. ACC Limited 28th Floor, Centre-…

ACC LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5655/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. ACC Limited v. Addl. CIT -Range 1(1) (Formerly known as The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. ACC Limited v. Asst. CIT-LTU (Formerly known as The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT – LTU v. M/s. ACC Limited 28th Floor, Centre-…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C)-I vs. SHRI SURESH NANDA

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/715/2014HC Delhi27 May 2015

Bench: The First & Second Appellate Authority In These Matters Was As To Whether The Assessee Could Be Treated As A Resident Indian For Purposes Of The Act During Ay 2007-08 & 2008-09. Whilst The 2015:Dhc:4804-Db

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260Section 6(1)(a)

…onstruction as results in equity over such literal meaning as is unjust. In taking this view, we draw strength from law laid down by the Supreme Court, inter alia, in the cases reported as CIT v. JH Gotla (1985) 156 ITR 323 and CWS (India) Ltd. CIT (1994) 208 ITR 649 (SC). 20. As is clear from the factual matrix, it has been a conscious decision taken, and choice made, by the assessee to be a non-resident consistently since 1985. It appears that he has been visiting India routinely but was never present in India (till the financial year 2005-06) for more than 182 days. Thus, he consciously did not int…