What is DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX v. S.R.M.B. DAIRY FARMING (P.) LTD. authority for?

Beneficial circulars issued under income-tax law must be applied retrospectively, whereas circulars that impose a burden or are oppressive must be applied prospectively only.

How many judgments cite DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX v. S.R.M.B. DAIRY FARMING (P.) LTD.?

49 judgments on BharatTax cite DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX v. S.R.M.B. DAIRY FARMING (P.) LTD. (400 ITR 9), spanning 2015 to 2022.

DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX v. S.R.M.B. DAIRY FARMING (P.) LTD. (400 ITR 9)

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICLAS LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 939/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R

Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

…rcular may apply retrospectively, but a circular imposing a burden has to be apply prospectively only. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income-tax V. S.R.M.B Dairy Farming (P.) Ltd. (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC). The Hon'ble Apex Court in its aforesaid judgment has held that beneficial circulars had to be applied retrospectively, while oppressive circulars had to be applied prospectively, observing as under: "25. It is in this context, the question arises, when the instruction expressly states that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1129/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R

Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

…rcular may apply retrospectively, but a circular imposing a burden has to be apply prospectively only. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income-tax V. S.R.M.B Dairy Farming (P.) Ltd. (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC). The Hon'ble Apex Court in its aforesaid judgment has held that beneficial circulars had to be applied retrospectively, while oppressive circulars had to be applied prospectively, observing as under: "25. It is in this context, the question arises, when the instruction expressly states that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still…

CIPLA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-1(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 1219/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalecipla Ltd., Vs. Dcit Cc-1(12) Cipla House, Peninsula 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Business Park, Gk Bldg, Mk Road, Mark, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400 013 Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc1450B Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. J.D. Mistry. Ar Respondent By : Shri. V. Sreekar. Dr Shri. Sanjay Sethi. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -47, Mumbai, Order Passed U/S 148 R.W.S 147 & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri. J.D. Mistry. ARFor Respondent: Shri. V. Sreekar. DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…cular may apply retrospectively, but a circular imposing a burden has to be apply prospectively only. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income-tax Vs. S.R.M.B Dairy Farming Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC). The Hon’ble Apex Court in its aforesaid judgment has held that beneficial circulars had to be applied retrospectively, while oppressive circulars had to be applied prospectively, observing as under: “25. It is in this context, the question arises, when the instruction expressly states that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI M.R.JAYARAM (HUF)

Appeal stands dismissed as not maintainable in view of aforestated

WTA/13/2015HC Karnataka29 Jan 2020

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH

Section 27

…been held that scope of Circular issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes would be applicable to the pending proceedings, which also came to be affirmed by Apex Court in the case DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX V/S S.R.M.B DAIRY FARMING (P) LTD. reported in (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC) vide paragraph 23. In fact, Central Board of Direct Taxes has also issued an instruction bearing No.F.No.279/MISC/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019 intimating all the Principal Chief 4 Commissioners of Income Tax that Circular No.17/2019 would be applicable on all pendin…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M.R.ANANDARAM (HUF)

Appeal stands dismissed as not maintainable in view of aforestated

WTA/15/2015HC Karnataka29 Jan 2020

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH

Section 27

…been held that scope of Circular issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes would be applicable to the pending proceedings, which also came to be affirmed by Apex Court in the case DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX V/S S.R.M.B DAIRY FARMING (P) LTD. reported in (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC) vide paragraph 23. In fact, Central Board of Direct Taxes has also issued an instruction bearing No.F.No.279/MISC/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019 intimating all the Principal Chief Commissioners of Income Tax that Circular No.17/2019 would be applicable on all pending SLPs/appeals/cross 4…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M.R.ANANDARAM (HUF)

Appeal stands dismissed as not maintainable in view of aforestated

WTA/18/2015HC Karnataka29 Jan 2020

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH

Section 27

…been held that scope of Circular issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes would be applicable to the pending proceedings, which also came to be affirmed by Apex Court in the case DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX V/S S.R.M.B DAIRY FARMING (P) LTD. reported in (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC) vide paragraph 23. In fact, Central Board of Direct Taxes has also issued an instruction bearing No.F.No.279/MISC/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019 intimating all the Principal Chief 4 Commissioners of Income Tax that Circular No.17/2019 would be applicable on all pendin…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI M.R.JANAKIRAM (HUF)

Appeal stands dismissed as not maintainable in view of aforestated

WTA/20/2015HC Karnataka29 Jan 2020

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH

Section 27

…been held that scope of Circular issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes would be applicable to the pending proceedings, which also came to be affirmed by Apex Court in the case DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX V/S S.R.M.B DAIRY FARMING (P) LTD. reported in (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC) vide paragraph 23. In fact, Central Board of Direct Taxes has also issued an instruction bearing No.F.No.279/MISC/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019 intimating all the Principal Chief 4 Commissioners of Income Tax that Circular No.17/2019 would be applicable on all pendin…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI M.R.SAMPANGIRAMAIAH(INDL)

Appeal stands dismissed as not maintainable in view of aforestated

WTA/29/2015HC Karnataka29 Jan 2020

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH

Section 27

…been held that scope of Circular issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes would be applicable to the pending proceedings, which also came to be affirmed by Apex Court in the case DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX V/S S.R.M.B DAIRY FARMING (P) LTD. reported in (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC) vide paragraph 23. In fact, Central Board of Direct Taxes has also issued an instruction bearing No.F.No.279/MISC/M-93/2018-ITJ dated 20.08.2019 intimating all the Principal Chief 4 Commissioners of Income Tax that Circular No.17/2019 would be applicable on all pendin…

ARISTO PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue stand dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1104/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Kumar Rastogi- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma - Ld.CIT-DR &

Section 33Section 37Section 37(1)

…rcular may apply retrospectively, but a circular imposing a burden has to be apply prospectively only. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income-tax V. S.R.M.B Dairy Farming (P.) Ltd. (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC). The Hon'ble Apex Court in its aforesaid judgment has held that beneficial circulars had to be applied retrospectively, while oppressive circulars had to be applied prospectively, observing as under: "25. It is in this context, the question arises, when the instruction expressly states that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still…

M/S. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICLAS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2458/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2010-11 Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Dcit, Cir.4(1)(2) Commerce House Vs. Ahmedabad. Opp: Rajvansh Apartment Judges Bungalow Road Ahmedabad 380 015 Pan : Aabct 0228 K

For Respondent: Shri Kishan Vyas, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

…rcular may apply retrospectively, but a circular imposing a burden has to be apply prospectively only. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income-tax V. S.R.M.B Dairy Farming (P.) Ltd. (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC). The Hon'ble Apex Court in its aforesaid judgment has held that beneficial circulars had to be applied retrospectively, while oppressive circulars had to be applied prospectively, observing as under: "25. It is in this context, the question arises, when the instruction expressly states that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still…

ARISTO PHARMACEUTICALS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 5807/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha () Aristo Pharmaceuticals P Ltd Vs Acit, Range-2(1)(1), Mumbai 3Rd Mercantile Chambers, Floor, 12, J.N. Heredia Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 Pan : Aaaca4495N Appellant Respondednt Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1), Mumbai Vs Aristo Pharmaceuticals P Ltd Mercantile Chambers, 3Rd Floor, 12, J.N. Heredia Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 Appellant Respondednt

Section 37(1)

…cular may apply retrospectively, but a circular imposing a burden has to be apply prospectively only. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income-tax Vs. S.R.M.B Dairy Farming Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 400 ITR 9 (SC). The Hon’ble Apex Court in its aforesaid judgment has held that beneficial circulars had to be applied retrospectively, while oppressive circulars had to be applied prospectively, observing as under: “25. It is in this context, the question arises, when the instruction expressly states that the benefit of the said policy is prospective, still…

KAMLA METHI,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5564/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Rajan Bhatia, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Mukharjee, Sr. DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5564/Del/2015 Assessment Year: 2011-12 KAMLA METHI, VS. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-28 B-276, 2ND FLOOR, NEW DELHI CHITTRANJAN PARK, NEW DELHI – 110 019 (PAN:- AAIPM7263K) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by: Sh. Rajan Bhatia, Adv. Revenue by: Smt. Ranu Mukharjee, Sr. DR. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal is filed by assessee against the Order dated 04.8.2015 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-16), New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2011-12 on the following grounds:-…