How many judgments cite (CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons.?

74 judgments on BharatTax cite (CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons. (210 ITR 886), spanning 2007 to 2023.

(CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons.

210 ITR 886Supreme Court of India1994#1525 most cited

What is (CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons. authority for?

Substantive law is concerned with the ends of justice, while procedural law deals with the means to attain them. Procedural changes do not affect substantive rights.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons · substantive law · procedural law · administration of justice · litigation · tax law interpretation

Issues it is cited on

section 234e(1)section 200a(1)(c)section 254(2)section 200a(1)section 200(3)section 200a section 234e section 254(1)section 200 tax deducted at source section 20 section 234

Judgments citing (CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons.

Madhyanchal Gramin Bank, Majholi Branch, Majholi vs. Cito-TDS-2 Jabalpur, Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee‟s appeals are dismissed

ITA 55/JAB/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur13 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

…be applicable w.e.f. that date, i.e., irrespective of the period to which the statement being processed thereunder may relate. Though the law in the matter is well-settled, one may toward this refer to the decision in CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons [1994] 210 ITR 886 (SC). In fact, even the levy is not retroactive, and is applicable only qua statements obliged to be filed on or after 01/7/2012. Further, for each case, the fees, though worked out (refer Note 1(c) of the Intimation) with reference to the due date of filing the statement for Qtr-II of f.y. 2012-13, i.e., 15/10/2012, the amount levied, being Rs.…

M/S Information Technology Park Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-11(2), Bangalore

ITA 1358/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Jha, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESEIDENT AND SHRI PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1357 & 1358/Bang/2018 Assessment years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 M/s. Information Technology Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Park Ltd., Ward 3(1)(4), 1st Floor, Innovator Building, Bangalore. International Technology Park, Whitefield Road, Bangalore – 560 066. PAN: AAACI 7042R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Padamchand Khincha, CA Respondent by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Jha, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 16.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 O R…

M/S Information Technology Park Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1)(4), Bangalore

ITA 1357/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Jha, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)

Lally Motors India Pvt. Ltd, Jalandhar vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jalandhar

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 218/ASR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 218(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Sameer Bhatia (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Bhawani Shankar (D. R.)

Section 119Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…sfied. It has nothing to do with the date of the passing of the order deemed erroneous, or the year to which it pertains. Being a part of the procedural law, the provision shall have effect from 01/06/2015 (also refer CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons [1994] 210 ITR 886 (SC)). Rather, as we find on a perusal of the cited decisions by the Apex Court settling the law in the matter, the assessment does not represent a correct application of the law, furnishing one more ground, albeit pari materia, for the assessment being liable for revision u/s. 263. We decide accordingly. 7. In the result, the assessee’s appeal i…

M/S Parmeshwari Hansraj Jain Khanga Dogra Trust, Ludhiana vs. CIT (Examption), Chandigarh

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 220/ASR/2017[0]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Feb 2018

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 220(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: [Pan: Aactp 4714A]

For Appellant: Sh. Hari Om Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur (D.R.)

Section 12Section 12A

…The same therefore would warrant a restoration back to the stage at which the irregularity had occurred (Hazari Mal Kuthiala v. ITO [1961] 41 ITR 12 (SC)). There is, it needs to be appreciated, no vested right in procedure (CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup [1994] 210 ITR 886 (SC)). We, accordingly, setting aside the impugned order, direct the disposal of the assessee’s application by the competent authority in accordance with law, even as was by the Tribunal in Ameliorating India (supra), whose order stands upheld by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. Needless to add, we do not, in doing so, express any opinion o…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sajjan Singh, Rajasthan

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

ITA 6640/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Shri Sajjan Singh, Central Circle-17, F-180, C-Scheme, Room No. 103, First Floor, Subhash Nagar, Jaipur, Hall No. 1,Ara Centre, E-2, Pan:Apfps5687B Jhandewalan, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kr Tulisiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR

Section 132(4)Section 132bSection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 234B

…ot procedural law and is a substantive levy on the part of the government on the assessee and hence could be held to be prospective in operation only. Reliance is placed on the decision of the apex court in the case of CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swamp & Sons [1994] 210 ITR 886/76 Taxman 620, wherein it was held that : "Substantive law is concerned with the ends which the administration of justice seeks ; procedural law deals with the means and instruments by which those ends are to be attained. The latter regulates the conduct and relations of courts and litigants in respect of the litigation itself; the former determi…

ITO, Ward - 1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Gkw Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 459/KOL/2012[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2017AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh, I.T.A. No. 459/Kol/2012 Assessment Years: 1996-97

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(3)

…reported in (2014) 41 CCH 562 (Mum). The ld AR also placed reliance on the following decisions in support of his other contentions:- 8 I.T.A. No. 459/Kol/2012 Assessment Years: 1996-97 M/s. GKW Ltd. a) CWT vs Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons reported in (1994) 210 ITR 886 (SC) b) CIT vs Vatika Township P Ltd reported in (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC) c) CIT vs Virgin Creations in GA No. 3200/2011 dated 23.11.2011 rendered by Hon’ble Calcutta High Court d) CIT vs Karnataka Urban Infrastructure Development & Finance Corporation in ITA No. 129 of 2006 dated 21.2.2012 rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court. 5.5. We have h…

ITO 16(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Surya Gems, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 292/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-16(2)(4), M/S Surya Gems, बनाम/ 02Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Flat No.4, 02Nd Floor, Tardeo Road, Bhaveshwar Sgar Patel Vs. Mumbai-400007 Compound 20 Napean Sea Road, Mumbai-400020 (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aakfs6513Q याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri B.S. Bist-Dr यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By None ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2017 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 08/03/2017

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ, ई, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI श्री जोगगन्दय स िंह, न्मायमक दस्म एवुं श्री एन. के. प्रधान, रेखा दस्म, के भक्ष Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-16(2)(4), M/s Surya Gems, बनाम/ 02nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Flat No.4, 02nd Floor, Tardeo Road, Bhaveshwar Sgar Patel Vs. Mumbai-400007 Compound 20 Napean Sea Road, Mumbai-400020 (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. AAKFS6513Q याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by Shri B.S. Bist-DR यनधाारयती की ओ…

Shri Jyoti Mohan Mall, Kolkata vs. CIT, Kol - Xv, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 819/KOL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narsimha Charyassessment Year:2003-04

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

…oiding disparate valuations resulting from application of different methods of valuation respecting properties of a similar nature and character and accordingly is a procedural law which is applicable to pending cases [CWT VS SHARVAN KUMAR SWAMP & SONS (1992) 210 ITR 886 (SC)]. In the facts of the instant case, due to the unintended interpretation of the scope of the provisions of s.153C of the Act, the law was amended to ensure a reasonable approach or as otherwise, due to conflicting decisions on the subject, the construction of such provisions was leading to absurdity. Without taking the aid of the amended pro…

Sandersons & Morgans, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 54, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1520/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Sept 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] Assessment Year : 2004-05 (Appellant ) (Respondent) Sandersans & Morgans -Versus- A.C.I.T., Circle-54, Kolkata Kolkata (Pan:Abbfs 4291 B) For The Appellant : Shri J.P.Khaitan & Shri S.Basu, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri D.Banerjee, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2015 Order Per Shri M.Balaganesh, Am 1. This Appeal Of The Revenue Arises Out Of The Order Of The Learned Cita In Appeal No. 85/Cit(A)-Xxxvii/Acit-54/08-09. Dated 18.03.2009 For The Asst Year 2004-05 Arising Out Of The Order Of The Learned Assessing Officer Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri J.P.Khaitan & Shri S.Basu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.Banerjee, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 155(14)Section 199(3)

…ions in support of his contentions:- Escorts Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2007) 15 SOT 368 (Delhi ITAT) 3 Sandersans & Morgans A.Yr.2004-05 Alipurduar Tea Co. Ltd vs Agricultural ITO reported in 112 ITR 878 (Cal) CWT vs Sharvan Kumar Swarup and Sons reported in 210 ITR 886 (SC) In response to this, the Learned DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities. 3.2. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the provisions of section 199(3) of the Act read with Rule 37BA of Income Tax Rules would squarely apply in the facts of the instant case. For the…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Kuber Tobacco Products Pvt Ltd

The appeal stands disposed of

ITA/1159/2010HC Delhi06 Oct 2010

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL

Section 143(2)Section 158Section 292Section 2g

…t and with a view to illustratc the distinction bctr,vccn the interpretation of the charging provision of a statute and thc interpretation of a machinery provision, a large number of judgmcnts \,verc cited, including the following: - D CIf vs. Shruwon l(umtr, 210 ITR 886 (SC); 2) Associatecl Cement Co.. Ltd. vs. CTO, 48 STC 466 (SC); 3) Vishwansth Prsssd Bltugwati Prostd, 202 ITR 469 (AII); Sant Bobo Mohon Singh vs. CIT, 90ITR 197 (All); Kopwrchond Shrimal vs. CIT' 131 ITR 451 (SC); 4) s) ITA No. lI59/2010 Page 5 of 17 6) Rasikkomani vs. CIT, 203 ITR 848 (Bom); 7) Jai Prakash Singh vs. CIT' 219 IfR !37 (SC); a…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Kuber Tobacco Products Pvt Ltd

The appeal stands disposed of

ITA - 1161 / 2010HC Delhi06 Oct 2010

Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 158BSection 292

…t and with a view to illustrate the distinction between the interpretation of the charging provision of a statute and the interpretation of a machinery provision, a large number of judgments were cited, including the following: - - 1) CIT vs. Shrawan Kumar, 210 ITR 886 (SC); - 2) Associated Cement Co. Ltd. vs. CTO, 48 STC 466 (SC); - 3) Vishwanath Prasad Bhagwati Prasad, 202 ITR 469 (All); - 4) Sant Baba Mohan Singh vs. CIT, 90 ITR 197 (All); - 5) Kapurchand Shrimal vs. CIT, 131 ITR 451 (SC); ![](_page_6_Picture_1.jpeg) - 6) Rasikkamani vs. CIT, 203 ITR 848 (Bom.); - 7) Jai Prakash Singh vs. CIT, 219…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA-49/2005HC Delhi30 Apr 2007

…ation or investment allowance in the context of Section 43-A of the Act. (e) The amendment to Section 43-A with effect from 1-4- 2003 is only clarificatory and has a retrospective effect. Reliance is placed on the decisions in CWT -vs- Swaran Kumar Swarup, 210 ITR 886 (SC), Poddar Cement -vs- CIT, 226 ITR 625 (SC), Lohia Machines -vs- CIT, 152 ITR 308, Motilal Pesticides -vs- CIT, 295 ITR 433. (f) In the context of increase in liability on account of increase in the rate of foreign exchange held in revenue account, it is submitted that unless the increase in the rate of exchange results in an outfl…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. India Pvt. Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/49/2005HC Delhi30 Apr 2007