Director of Settlements A.P v. M.R. Apparao

4 SCC 638Reported decision2002#11656 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2023.

Judgments citing Director of Settlements A.P v. M.R. Apparao

PRINCIPAL COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, SAMBALPUR vs. BINAY KUMAR JINDAL, HUF

Accordingly, this appeal fails and is dismissed

ITA/7/2023HC Orissa02 Mar 2023

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Section 174Section 189

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE APO/7/2023 WITH WPO/ 557/ 2019 SUDIP KUSARYE AND ANR. VS THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE AND The Hon'ble JUSTICE APURBA SINHA RAY For Appellants : Mr. Arindam Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Hare Krishna Halder, Adv. Mr. Koushik Bhatacharyya, Adv. Mr. Chayan Gupta, Adv. For Kolkata Municipal Corporation : Mr. Alak Kr. Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Biswajit Mukherjee, Adv. Ms. Tanushree Dasgupta, Adv. Mr. Debangshu Mondal, A…

CHANDRAKANT S/O TAMMANNA MAJAGI vs. KARNATAKA STATE BAR COUNCIL

Appeal is allowed

WA/100141/2020HC Karnataka30 Nov 2020

Bench: M.I.ARUN,G.NARENDAR

Section 4

…- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT APPEAL NO.100141/2020 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI CHANDRAKANT S/O. TAMMANNA MAJAGI, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC. ADVOCATE AND VICE PRESIDENT OF BELAGAVI BAR ASSOCIATION, BELAGAVI, R/O. PLOT NO.1011, CTS NO.5646, SECTOR NO.VI, M.M.EXTENSION, SHRINAGAR, BELAGAVI 590017. …APPELLANT (BY SRI.MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADV.) AND: 1. KARNATAKA STATE BAR COUNCIL, OLD ELECTION COMMISSION BUILDING, BENGALURU…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S AZTEC SOFT LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 878/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Oct 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Jaya Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R
Section 10A

…um. Obiter dictum though is entitled to a weight cannot be equated with ratio decidendi of a case. In support of his contention as above, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Settlements A.P. v. M.R. Apparao [2002] 4 SCC 638. Countering the submission of the learned DR that the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Pentair (supra) is not ratio decidendi as it was merely dismissal of appeal u/s.260A of the Act on the ground that no substantial question of law arose for consideration, learned counsel drew our attention to the decision of the B…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. JIVHESHWARA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 349/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Jaya Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R
Section 10A

…um. Obiter dictum though is entitled to a weight cannot be equated with ratio decidendi of a case. In support of his contention as above, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Settlements A.P. v. M.R. Apparao [2002] 4 SCC 638. Countering the submission of the learned DR that the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Pentair (supra) is not ratio decidendi as it was merely dismissal of appeal u/s.260A of the Act on the ground that no substantial question of law arose for consideration, learned counsel drew our attention to the decision of the B…

ITO, BANGALORE vs. M/S CENDUIT INDIA SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the CO is partly allowed

ITA 59/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R.Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Ketan K Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 431B

…is entitled to a weight cannot be equated with ratio decidendi of a case. In support of his contention as above, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Settlements A.P. and others Vs. M.R. Apparao and another (2002) 4 SCC 638. Countering the submission of the learned DR that the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Pentair (supra) is not ratio decidendi as it was merely IT(TP)A No.59/Bang/2016 CO No.57/Bang/2016 Page 18 of 25 dismissal of appeal u/s.260A of the Act on the ground that no substantial question of law arose for consideration,…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S INDEPENDENT TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed and the CO by the assessee is also partly allowed

ITA 1086/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Pradeep, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sreenandini Das, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 92Section 92C

…is entitled to a weight cannot be equated with ratio decidendi of a case. In support of his contention as above, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Settlements A.P. and others Vs. M.R. Apparao and another (2002) 4 SCC 638. Countering the submission of the learned DR that the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Pentair (supra) is not ratio decidendi as it was merely dismissal of appeal u/s.260A of the Act on the ground that no substantial question of law arose for consideration, learned counsel drew our attention to the decision of the B…

M/S. TRIAMBAKE INFO TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3732/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini

Section 133(6)Section 40

…cision has no binding effect under Article 141 of the constitution would be apparent from the decisions in Municipal Corpn. Of Delhi v. Gurnam Kaur AIR 1989 SC 38; Gangadharan V. Janardan Mallar Air 1996 Sc 2124; Director of Settlements V. M.R. Apparao (2002) 4 SCC 638 at p. 650, relied upon by Mr. Deb. In these decisions, it was held that the decision by the Apex Court dismissing the SLP without entering into the merits of the case would not be binding under Article 141. If the SLP is dismissed by non-speaking order, it does not lay down any law. Article 141 is not applicable on a statement of fact and matter ot…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-1) vs. LATE SHRI SUDHIR SAREEN

ITA/284/2015HC Delhi06 Jul 2015

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

Section 375

…5 : 1960 Cri LJ 283] that as on facts no two cases could be similar, its own decisions which were essentially on questions of fact could not be relied upon as precedents for decision of other cases. 49 34. In Director of Settlements v. M.R. Apparao [(2002) 4 SCC 638] , this Court extensively elaborated upon the principle of binding precedent. The relevant para 7 is reproduced hereunder : (SCC pp. 650-51) “7. … Article 141 of the Constitution unequivocally indicates that the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India. The aforesaid Article empowers the Sup…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. Mahaveer Infoway Limited,

In revival of another illegal order of promotion of appellant

ITTA/452/2011HC Telangana04 Apr 2012

Bench: Joint Director (Bal Rog), Medical Health & Family Welfare, U.P. Lucknow (Hereinafter Referred To As “J.D.”) Stating That Some New Districts Have Been Created Wherein He Should Be Given Promotion As A Clerk Since He Has Passed Intermediate With Science & Knows Typing. Thereupon It Appears That A Letter Was Issued By J.D. On 20.12.1988 & Pursuant Thereto Chief Medical Officer Mau/Azamgarh (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cmo”) Passed Order On 14.03.1989 Promoting Petitioner On The Post Of Junior Clerk In The Scale Of Rs. 354-550 On Temporary Basis. Subsequently Order Of Promotion Was Cancelled Vide Order Dated 17.03.1989. Thereagainst Writ Petition Was Filed Which Has Been Dismissed By Learned Single

For Appellant: - Mahendra Nath SinghFor Respondent: - The Joint Director (Child Disease) and others

…The existence of special circumstances are required to be noticed before issuance of the direction by the High Court while invoking the jurisdiction under the said Article............" 38. Similarly, in Director of Settlement Vs. M.R. Apparao (2002) 4 SCC 638 in para 17 Apex Court held that power vested in High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is discretionary. 39. A Division Bench of this Court in Amarendra Singh Vs. State of U.P. 2008(1) ADJ 397 (DB)=2008(1)ESC 734 has held that since petitioner has invoked extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, the remedy is no…

Director of Settlements A.P v. M.R. Apparao (4 SCC 638) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax