G. Padmanabha Chattiyar & Sons. v. CIT

182 ITR 1High Court1990#5859 most cited

What is G. Padmanabha Chattiyar & Sons. v. CIT authority for?

A transaction cannot be split between the mercantile and cash methods of accounting.

20

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also referred to as

G. Padmanabha Chattiyar & Sons · CIT · 182 ITR 1 · mercantile system of accounting · cash method of accounting · accounting methods · business expenditure

Issues it is cited on

explanation to section 37application of incomemercantile system of accountingcommercial expediencysection 115jbsection 37(1)liable to taxrevenue expendituresection 37section 28transferprescribed

Judgments citing G. Padmanabha Chattiyar & Sons. v. CIT

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ballari vs. H R Gaviappa and Co, Ballari

ITA 825/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Siva Prasad Reddy, A.R
Section 250Section 37(1)

…d therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions: • CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC) • G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad) • ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal) • CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held that entire income accrued to assessee while deciding grounds 2.1 &2.2. In the i…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. The Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/82/2018HC Himachal Pradesh07 Dec 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL KUKREJA

Section 145Section 36Section 43D

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA ITA Nos.82 & 83 of 2018. Reserved on : 24th November, 2022. Date of Decision : 7th December, 2022. ITA No.82 of 2018. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax …...Appellant Versus The Kangra Central Co-op Bank Ltd. …...Respondent ITA No.83 of 2018. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax …...Appellant Versus The Kangra Central Co-op Bank Ltd. …...Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Ms. Justice Sabina, Judge The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For t…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. The Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/83/2018HC Himachal Pradesh07 Dec 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL KUKREJA

Section 145Section 36Section 43D

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA ITA Nos.82 & 83 of 2018. Reserved on : 24th November, 2022. Date of Decision : 7th December, 2022. ITA No.82 of 2018. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax …...Appellant Versus The Kangra Central Co-op Bank Ltd. …...Respondent ITA No.83 of 2018. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax …...Appellant Versus The Kangra Central Co-op Bank Ltd. …...Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Ms. Justice Sabina, Judge The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For t…

M/S. the Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd, Sandur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1965/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri S. Parthasarathi
Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 1964 & 1965/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 M/s. The Sandur Manganese & Iron The Assistant Ores Ltd., Commissioner of Sandur House, Income Tax, Laxmipur, Circle – 1, Tq: Sandur. Vs. Bellary. PAN: AAACT7495D APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Shri S. Parthasarathi, Assessee by Advocate : Shri V.S. Chakrapani, CIT- Revenue by DR Date of Hearing : 01-06-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 29-06-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeals are filed by…

M/S. the Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd, Sandur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1964/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri S. Parthasarathi
Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 1964 & 1965/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 M/s. The Sandur Manganese & Iron The Assistant Ores Ltd., Commissioner of Sandur House, Income Tax, Laxmipur, Circle – 1, Tq: Sandur. Vs. Bellary. PAN: AAACT7495D APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Shri S. Parthasarathi, Assessee by Advocate : Shri V.S. Chakrapani, CIT- Revenue by DR Date of Hearing : 01-06-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 29-06-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeals are filed by…

M/S Kariganur Mineral Mining Industry, Hospet vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed and the appeal filed for AY 2013-14 is allowed

ITA 1539/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Siva Prasad Reddy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

…iation of profits and hence it cannot be said to have been incurred for the purpose of business or earning the profits. (d) The AO placed his reliance on the following case laws:- (i) CIT vs. KCP Limited (245 ITR 421)(SC) (ii) G. Padmanabha Chettiar & Sons (182 ITR 1,5)(Mad) iii) Reform Flour Mills P Ltd vs. CIT (132 ITR 184, 196) (Cal.) (iv) CIT vs. A. Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Others (53 ITR 122)(SC) Accordingly, the AO added the above said amounts in the total income of the assessee of respective years. The Ld CIT(A) also confirmed the same. 4.2 Before us, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision render…

M/S Kariganur Mineral Mining Industry, Hospet vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed and the appeal filed for AY 2013-14 is allowed

ITA 1538/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Siva Prasad Reddy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

…iation of profits and hence it cannot be said to have been incurred for the purpose of business or earning the profits. (d) The AO placed his reliance on the following case laws:- (i) CIT vs. KCP Limited (245 ITR 421)(SC) (ii) G. Padmanabha Chettiar & Sons (182 ITR 1,5)(Mad) iii) Reform Flour Mills P Ltd vs. CIT (132 ITR 184, 196) (Cal.) (iv) CIT vs. A. Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Others (53 ITR 122)(SC) Accordingly, the AO added the above said amounts in the total income of the assessee of respective years. The Ld CIT(A) also confirmed the same. 4.2 Before us, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision render…

B Rudra Gouda, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed and the appeal by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 938/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Oct 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 32(1)Section 37Section 37(1)

…d therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions:  CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC)  G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad)  ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal)  CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy udaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held that entire income accrued to assesee while deciding grounds 2.1 &2.2. In the iss…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary vs. Sri B Rudra Gowda, Bellary

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed and the appeal by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1199/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Oct 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 32(1)Section 37Section 37(1)

…d therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions:  CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC)  G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad)  ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal)  CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy udaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held that entire income accrued to assesee while deciding grounds 2.1 &2.2. In the iss…

M/S Zeenath Transport Company, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated herein above

ITA 1780/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Siva Prasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 135Section 37Section 37(1)

…therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions: • CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC) • G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad) • ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal) • CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held Page 14 of 41 ITA Nos.1780 - 1782/Bang/2018 that entire income accrued to as…

M/S Gogga Gurusanthaiah and Brothers, Hospet vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3319/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 37

…ed to Sugar Equalization Fund of the Government." 4.2.j. Further, Reliance may be placed on the following decisions wherein, it is held that the transaction cannot be split in to Mercantile and Cash method of accounting - G. Padmanabha Chattiyar & Sons Vs CIT 182 ITR 1,5 (Mad.), - Reform Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd., Vs CIT 132 ITR 184, 196 (Cal), - CIT Vs A Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Others 53 ITR 122 (SC). 4.2.k. In view of above facts brought on record, the amount of Rs.16,29,36,712/- (Rs.13,10,94,826+Rs.3,18,41,886) claimed as expenditure under SPY Charges and debited to P & L A/c is disallowed and added back to the re…

M/S Gogga Gurusanthaiah and Brothers, Hospet vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3318/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 37

…ed to Sugar Equalization Fund of the Government." 4.2.j. Further, Reliance may be placed on the following decisions wherein, it is held that the transaction cannot be split in to Mercantile and Cash method of accounting - G. Padmanabha Chattiyar & Sons Vs CIT 182 ITR 1,5 (Mad.), - Reform Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd., Vs CIT 132 ITR 184, 196 (Cal), - CIT Vs A Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Others 53 ITR 122 (SC). 4.2.k. In view of above facts brought on record, the amount of Rs.16,29,36,712/- (Rs.13,10,94,826+Rs.3,18,41,886) claimed as expenditure under SPY Charges and debited to P & L A/c is disallowed and added back to the re…

M/S Gogga Gurusanthaiah and Brothers, Hospet vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3317/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 37

…ed to Sugar Equalization Fund of the Government." 4.2.j. Further, Reliance may be placed on the following decisions wherein, it is held that the transaction cannot be split in to Mercantile and Cash method of accounting - G. Padmanabha Chattiyar & Sons Vs CIT 182 ITR 1,5 (Mad.), - Reform Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd., Vs CIT 132 ITR 184, 196 (Cal), - CIT Vs A Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Others 53 ITR 122 (SC). 4.2.k. In view of above facts brought on record, the amount of Rs.16,29,36,712/- (Rs.13,10,94,826+Rs.3,18,41,886) claimed as expenditure under SPY Charges and debited to P & L A/c is disallowed and added back to the re…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.314 & 315/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Shri B. Rudragouda, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner No.2198, BKG House, of Income Tax, KHB Colony, Circle 1, Sandur, Bellary – 583 101. Bellary. PAN: AFUPG 1386A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Chythanya K.K., Advocate Respondent by : Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 12.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 15.04.2021 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Me…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.314 & 315/Bang/2020 Assessment years : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Shri B. Rudragouda, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner No.2198, BKG House, of Income Tax, KHB Colony, Circle 1, Sandur, Bellary – 583 101. Bellary. PAN: AFUPG 1386A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Chythanya K.K., Advocate Respondent by : Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 12.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 15.04.2021 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Me…

M/S Muneer Enterprises, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 696/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Shiv Prasad Reddy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT
Section 37(1)

…arned AC relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. K.C.P. Limited (SC) 421. The learned AG also placed relied on the following : (i). C. Padmanabha Chattiyar & Sons vs. C1T182 HR 1, 5 (Mad.) (ii). Reform Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd., vs. CIT 132 ITR 184, 196 (Cal) (iii). CIT vs. A Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Others 53 ITR 122 (SC). Observations of the learned CIT(A). 2.1.11. The learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal holding that the amount retained was penalty in nature and as such, cannot be allowed as expenditure u/s 37(1).” 4. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. AO, assessee preferred appeal before t…

Ashwathnarayana Singh and Co, Bellry vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result appeal is filed by assessee for year under consideration stands allowed

ITA 522/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Laxminiwas Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 37

…d therefore has to be disallowed in the hands of assessee. He submitted that Ld.AO in support of disallowing the claim of expenditure relied on following decisions: • CIT vs.KCP Ltd. reported in 245 ITR 421(SC) • G.Padnabha Chettiyar & Sons vs.CIT reported in 182 ITR 1(Mad) • ReformFlour Mills Pvt.Ltd Vs.CIT reported in 132 ITR 184,196(Cal) • CIT vs.A.Krishnaswamy udaliar & Ors reported in 53 ITR 122(SC) We note that these decisions are on the accrual of income, which has been considered by us in forgoing paras. We have already held that entire income accrued to assesee while deciding grounds 2.1 &2.2. In the iss…

M/S. Veerabhadrappa Sangappa & Company, Sandur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1054/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013–14

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT
Section 145Section 28Section 5

…ed to Sugar Equalization Fund of the Government." 4.2.j. Further, Reliance may be placed on the following decisions wherein, it is held that the transaction cannot be split in to Mercantile and Cash method of accounting - G. Padmanabha Chattiyar & Sons Vs CIT 182 ITR 1,5 (Mad.), - Reform Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd., Vs CIT 132 ITR 184, 196 (Cal), - CIT Vs A Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Others 53 ITR 122 (SC). 4.2.k. In view of above facts brought on record, the amount of Rs.16,29,36,712/-(Rs.13,10,94,826+Rs.3,18,41,886) claimed as expenditure under SPY Charges and debited to P & L A/c is disallowed and added back to the ret…

Sri V.N.K.Memon, Bellary District vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Gulbarga

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

ITA 157/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year : 2012-13 Shri V.N.K. Memon, The Assistant Khb Colony, Commissioner Of Sandur, Vs. Income Tax, Bellary District. Circle – 1, Pan: Agxpm5124G Bellary. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Balachandran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

…ing, a part of receipt cannot be taken on piecemeal / receipt basis. The reliance is placed on the following decisions wherein it is held that the transaction cannot be split in to mercantile and cash method of accounting: G PadmanabhaChattivar& Sons vs. CIT 182 ITR 1, 5 (Mad.), Reform Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT 132 ITR 184,196 (Cal) CIT v/s A Krishnaswamy Mudaliar& Others 53 ITR 122 (SC). Further, reliance is placed on the following decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court wherein it was held that the amount receivable has to be credited irrespective of the receipt thereof and the expenditure therefore has to be…

M/S Sucon India Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4519/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Acit, Circle-Ii, New Delhi M/S. Sucon India Ltd., B-532, Nehru Ground Nit, Faridabad Pan : Aagcs9603L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Sh. Amit Kumar, Advocates Respondent By Sh. S.S. Rana, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 29.11.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 18.01.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.:

Section 143(2)Section 43(5)Section 73

…chase and sale of shares be deemed to be a speculation business. The circular issued by the CBDT cannot override the provisions introduced by the Parliament. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Keshavji Raoji & Co. vs. CIT (1990) 82 CTR (SC) 123 : (1990) 182 ITR 1 (SC) held that as long as there is no ambiguity in the statutory language, resort to any interpretative process to unfold the legislative intent becomes impermissible. The requirement of interpretation arises only when the words used in the statute are, on their own terms, ambivalent and do not manifest the intention of the legislature. 6. Further…

G. Padmanabha Chattiyar & Sons. v. CIT (182 ITR 1) — Cited in 20 Judgments | BharatTax