Director of Enforcement v. MCTM Corpn. (P) Ltd.

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. RAM AWATAR DHOOT

The appeal is partly allowed and the substantial questions of

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Dated : 7Th March, 2025. Appearance:

…reme Court had taken note of the statutory provisions namely, Section 271(1)(c) and Section 276-C referred to the decisions in Chairman, SEBI vs. Shriram Mutual Fund & Another, (2006) 5 SCC 361, Director of Enforcement vs. MCTM Corporation (P) Ltd. (1996) 2 SCC 471, Gujarat Travancore Agency vs. CIT, (1989) 3 SCC 52 and held that the explanations appended to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act entirely indicates the element of strict liability on the assessee for concealment or for giving inaccurate particulars while filing return. It was further held that the judgment in Dilip N. Shroff vs. CIT, (200…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ITC LIMITED

Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI,HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ

…om 2139 : (2013) 256 CTR 252 (Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, [paras 25 and 28] ; IX. (1972) 4 SCC 124 (M/s. Karam Chand Thapar & Bros. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Calcutta) [paras 1 to 4] ; X. (1969) 2 SCC 471 (Ahmed G.H. Ariff & Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Calcutta); [para 8]; Page 46 of 77 XI. AIR 1959 SC 498 (Rameshwar Proshad Khandelwal & Ors. Vs. Commissioners, Land Reforms & Jagirs, Madhya Bharat & Ors.); Submission on behalf of the respondent:- 12. Sri J. P. Khaitan, learned senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Nila…

SHRI. H. K. SATISH vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice M.G.S.Kamal

…ioner and Others, reported in ILR 2011 KAR 2460. 3) Mohinder Singh Gill and Anr. Vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and Ors., reported in (1978) 1 SCC 405 4) State of Punjab and Anr. Vs. Gurdial Singh and Ors., reported in (1980) 2 SCC 471 5) Mrs.Behroze Ramyar Batha Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer reported in I.L.R. 1991 KAR 3556 6) A.V.Venkateswaran, Collector of Customs, Bombany Vs. Ramchand Sobhral Wadhwani and Anr., reported in AIR 1961 SCC 1506 (V 48 C 282) 7) Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Companies District I, Calcutta and A…

SHIV RAJ GUPTA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI IV

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

…he above aspects are seldom borne in mind in many cases and second appeals are entertained and/or disposed of, without conforming to the above discipline.” This statement of the law was followed in Dnyanoba Bhaurao Shemade v. Maroti Bhaurao Marnor (1999) 2 SCC 471 (See paragraph 10). A recent decision of this Court in Biswanath Ghosh v. Gobinda Ghosh (2014) 11 SCC 605 has reiterated these principles in paragraph 16 as follows: 14 “16. Section 100 of the Code lays down the provision with regard to the second appeal which reads as under: “100.Second appeal.—(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided…

The Commissioner of Income Tax- IV vs. M/s. Prabhat Agri Bio Tech P Ltd.

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

…n Case No. 18557 of 2019], the learned counsel submitted that without due process of law, the trollies could not have been repossessed by Ashok Leyland. Furthermore, Reliance has been placed on Bihar State Financial Corpn. v. Chhotanagpur Minerals, (2009) 2 SCC 471 to contend that when the HPA was with respect to the trailers alone, Ashok Leyland had no authority to seize the trollies as well. Therefore, the action of seizure itself was illegal and the non-return of the trollies to their true owner by the Ashok Leyland established the liability to pay the cost of the trollies. 24. The learned counsel f…

DILIP N. SHROFF vs. JOINT COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI &ANR

The appeal is allowed

…http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 26 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 2746 of 2007 PETITIONER: Dilip N. Shroff RESPONDENT: Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai & Anr DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/05/2007 BENCH: S.B. Sinha & P.K. Balasubramanyan JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2746 OF 2007 [Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.26831 of 2004] S.B. SINHA, J : 1. Leave granted. 2. The Appellant herein is an assessee under the Income Tax Act. It is an HUF. For the assessment year 1998-99, an income of Rs.30,80,030/- was declared by it, inter alia, showing a long term ca…