Goodyear v. State of Haryana

188 ITR 402Supreme Court of India1991#1197 most cited

What is Goodyear v. State of Haryana authority for?

A reasonable construction of a taxing statute should be followed, and a literal construction should be avoided if it defeats the manifest purpose and object of the Act.

94

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,418 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Goodyear India Ltd. v. State of Haryana · 188 ITR 402 · reasonable construction · literal construction · taxing statute · manifest purpose and object · Income Tax Act

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 147 of the Income Tax ActSection 148 of the Income Tax ActSection 194CSection 234BSection 234B of the Income Tax ActSection 234CSection 234C of the Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

bright line testamp expenditurecomparable uncontrolled price methodsection 92(1)cost plus methodfunctional analysissection 80jjasection 80jjaasection 92fsection 92c(3)management feessection 55

Judgments citing Goodyear v. State of Haryana

ACIT, Jammu vs. Sh Vikramaditya Singh, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 269/ASR/2007[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…d in 414 ITR 227 33.6. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that a precedent is an authority only for what it actually decides and not what may remotely or even logically follow from it: i. Goodyear India Ltd. vs. State of Haryana and another, 188 ITR 402 ii. QUINN v. LEATHEM [1901] AC 495 (HL) iii. STATE OF ORISSA v. SUDHANSU SEKHAR MISRA [1968] 2 SCR 154 34. In so far as Ground No. 5 raised by revenue in the case of Shri. M.K. Ajatshatru Singh is concerned, he submitted that ld. AO has made the addition in respect of the agricultural income. 69 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.N…

ACIT, Cir-II, Jammu vs. Smt. Yashorajya Laxmi, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 268/ASR/2007[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…d in 414 ITR 227 33.6. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that a precedent is an authority only for what it actually decides and not what may remotely or even logically follow from it: i. Goodyear India Ltd. vs. State of Haryana and another, 188 ITR 402 ii. QUINN v. LEATHEM [1901] AC 495 (HL) iii. STATE OF ORISSA v. SUDHANSU SEKHAR MISRA [1968] 2 SCR 154 34. In so far as Ground No. 5 raised by revenue in the case of Shri. M.K. Ajatshatru Singh is concerned, he submitted that ld. AO has made the addition in respect of the agricultural income. 69 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.N…

ACIT, Jammu vs. Dr Karan Singh, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 267/ASR/2007[1998-99\u005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005c]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…d in 414 ITR 227 33.6. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that a precedent is an authority only for what it actually decides and not what may remotely or even logically follow from it: i. Goodyear India Ltd. vs. State of Haryana and another, 188 ITR 402 ii. QUINN v. LEATHEM [1901] AC 495 (HL) iii. STATE OF ORISSA v. SUDHANSU SEKHAR MISRA [1968] 2 SCR 154 34. In so far as Ground No. 5 raised by revenue in the case of Shri. M.K. Ajatshatru Singh is concerned, he submitted that ld. AO has made the addition in respect of the agricultural income. 69 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.N…

ACIT, Jammu vs. Sh M.K. Ajat Shatru, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 263/ASR/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…d in 414 ITR 227 33.6. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that a precedent is an authority only for what it actually decides and not what may remotely or even logically follow from it: i. Goodyear India Ltd. vs. State of Haryana and another, 188 ITR 402 ii. QUINN v. LEATHEM [1901] AC 495 (HL) iii. STATE OF ORISSA v. SUDHANSU SEKHAR MISRA [1968] 2 SCR 154 34. In so far as Ground No. 5 raised by revenue in the case of Shri. M.K. Ajatshatru Singh is concerned, he submitted that ld. AO has made the addition in respect of the agricultural income. 69 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.N…

Ramjee Concretes Pvt.Ltd., Mohali vs. ITO-Ward-6(3), Chandigarh

The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

ITA 205/CHANDI/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 205/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Ramjee Concretes Private Limited, The Ito, बनाम #1238.Sector 91, Ward 6(3), Mohali, Punjab Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aafcr9457E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

…T Vs Radhe Developers 341 ITR 403 ]. One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear Vs State of Haryana 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interpretation cannot go to the extent of reading…

Shahi Exports Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 843/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Delhi17 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 37Section 40A(2)Section 80ISection 92BSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘I-2’ BENCH, NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 843/DEL/2021 [A.Y 2016-17] M/s Shahi Exports Pvt. Ltd Vs. The Addl.C.I.T F – 88, Okhla Industrial Area New Delhi Phase – 1, New Delhi PAN: AAJCS 1175 L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv Shri Deepak Malik, Adv Department By : Shri Mahesh Shah, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 11.01.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 17.01.2022 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal by the assessee is…

Cenduit (India) Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 227/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Ketan K. Ved, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…T v. Radhe Developers 341 ITR 403 ]. One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear v. State of Haryana 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interpretation cannot go to the extent of reading…

Kalyani Steels Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 14, Pune

The appeal of the assesse is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1403/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao() & Shri Ravish Sood () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Kalyani Steels Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Mundhwa, Vs. Income-Tax Circle-14, Pune – 411 036 Aaykarsadan, Bodhi Tower, 548/2B, Salisbury Park, Gultekdi, Pune – 411 037. Pan No. Aaack7315D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Nikhil Pathak, A.RFor Respondent: Shri. M.G Jasnani, D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…T Vs Radhe Developers 341 ITR 403 ]. One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear Vs State of Haryana 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interpretation cannot go to the extent of reading…

Expeditors International of Washinton, Usa, Washington vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2)(2) Int.Tax., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 180/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 234CSection 271Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…T Vs Radhe Developers 341 ITR 403 ]. One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear Vs State of Haryana 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted www.taxguru.in 11 TXA17&18-13 dt.28.02.2020 liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interp…

Expeditors International of Washington Inc., Usa vs. ACIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1904/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 144C(13)Section 234BSection 234CSection 271Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…T Vs Radhe Developers 341 ITR 403 ]. One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear Vs State of Haryana 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted www.taxguru.in 11 TXA17&18-13 dt.28.02.2020 liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interp…

Nikhil Mohine, Parasia vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 38/JAB/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur18 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ally decides and not what may remotely or even logically follow from it (see: Bhavnagar University v. Palitana Sugar Mills [2003] (2) SCC 511; CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 297 (SC); Goodyear India Ltd. vs. State of Haryana &Anr.[1991] 188 ITR 402 (SC); LachmanDass Bhatia Hingwala (P.)Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB). The argument of hardship in Alom Extrusions (supra) is not applicable to the employee-contribution as the money stands already received by the employer and, two, the prescribed date is only that by which it is supposed to deposit both the contributions with th…

Nikhil Mohine, Chhindwara vs. DCIT, CPC, Benguluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 37/JAB/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur18 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ly decides and not what may remotely or even logically follow from it (see: Bhavnagar University v. Palitana Sugar Mills [2003] (2) SCC 511; CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 297 (SC); Goodyear India Ltd. vs. State of Haryana & Anr. [1991] 188 ITR 402 (SC); Lachman Dass Bhatia Hingwala (P.) Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 243 (Del)(FB)). The argument of hardship in Alom Extrusions (supra) is not applicable to the employee- contribution as the money stands already received by the employer and, two, the prescribed date is only that by which it is supposed to deposit both the contributions wit…

Bachhraj & Company Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 3 (1)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on the same terms

ITA 7349/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.7348 & 7349/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Bachhraj & Company The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Of Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Bajaj Bhawan, Room No. 607, Aayakar 226, Nariman Point, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan No. Aaacb5589N (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.R Revenue By : Shri Kprr Murty, D.R Date Of Hearing : 04/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/10/2021

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murty, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…T Vs Radhe Developers 341 ITR 403 ]. One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear Vs State of Haryana 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interpretation cannot go to the extent of reading…

Bachhraj & Company Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 3 (1)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on the same terms

ITA 7348/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.7348 & 7349/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Bachhraj & Company The Assistant Commissioner Private Limited, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Of Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Bajaj Bhawan, Room No. 607, Aayakar 226, Nariman Point, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan No. Aaacb5589N (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.R Revenue By : Shri Kprr Murty, D.R Date Of Hearing : 04/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/10/2021

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murty, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…T Vs Radhe Developers 341 ITR 403 ]. One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear Vs State of Haryana 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interpretation cannot go to the extent of reading…

Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 463/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench “I-2”, New Delhi

For Appellant: Mr. Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Shrivastava, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80ISection 92C

…axman 543/341 ITR 403 (Guj.). One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear v. State of Haryana [1991] 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interpretation cannot go to the extent of reading…

Ashok Kirtanlal Shah, Mumbai vs. Add. CIT CC-22 (1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 5842/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balalganesh () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ashok Kirtanlal Shah Addl. Cit-Range 19(1) (Presently, Addl, Circle 22(1) 401, 4Th Floor, Anand House, Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lal Baug, 13Th Road, Off. Linking Road, Mumbai 400 012 Khar West, Mumbai – 400 052

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.5842/Mum/2019 A.Y. 2010-11 1 Ashok Kirtanlal Shah Vs. Addl.CIT, Range-19(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALALGANESH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Ashok Kirtanlal Shah Addl. CIT-Range 19(1) (Presently, Addl, Circle 22(1) 401, 4th Floor, Anand House, Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lal Baug, 13th Road, Off. Linking Road, Mumbai 400 012 Khar West, Mumbai – 400 052 PAN No. AAHPS3203L (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee by : Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.R Revenue by : Shri Brajendra Kumar, D.R Date of Hearing : 23/08/2021 Date of pronouncement : 01/09…

M/S Novozymes South Asia Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 895/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.894/Bang/2018 Assessment Year:2012-13

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…axman 543/341 ITR 403 (Guj.). One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear v. State of Haryana [1991] 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interpretation cannot go to the extent of reading…

M/S Novozymes South Asia Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 894/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.894/Bang/2018 Assessment Year:2012-13

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…axman 543/341 ITR 403 (Guj.). One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear v. State of Haryana [1991] 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interpretation cannot go to the extent of reading…

The Sarswat Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 1 (3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 6609/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Anil Sathe, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Neehar Pandey, CIT D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 3Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…T Vs Radhe Developers 341 ITR 403 ]. One can only look fairly at the language used. No tax can be imposed by inference or analogy. It is also not permissible to construe a taxing statute by making assumptions and presumptions [See Goodyear Vs State of Haryana 188 ITR 402(SC)]. 21. There are several decisions which lay down rule that the provision for deduction, exemption or relief should be interpreted liberally, reasonably and in favour of the assessee and it should be so construed as to effectuate the object of the legislature and not to defeat it. Further, the interpretation cannot go to the extent of reading…

Roop Kumar Bansal, Gurgaon vs. Pr, CIT (Central), Gurgaon

In the result, ITA.No.383/Del

ITA 386/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P.Kant

For Appellant: And Shri Lalit Mohan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153B(1)(b)Section 263

…many cases and relied upon Judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Goodyear India Ltd., vs., State of Haryana 73 ITA.Nos.383, 384, 385 & 386/Del./2021 Smt. Abha Bansal, Sh Pankaj Bansal, Sh Basant Bansal And Sh Roop Kumar Bansal, Gurgaon. [1991] 188 ITR 402 (SC) and CIT vs., Sun Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd., [1992] 198 ITR 297 (SC). 8. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. relied upon the impugned order of Learned PCIT and submitted that the plain reading of provisions of Section 263 of the Act makes it clear that CIT may call for and examine “any proceeding under this Act”. Thus, proceedings under section 15…