Grindlays Bank v. CIT

193 ITR 457High Court1992#13661 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 124(2)Section 124(3)(a)Section 124(3)(c)Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)

Judgments citing Grindlays Bank v. CIT

Veerprabhu Auto Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 2(4), Kol, Kolkata

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

ITA 1218/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 250

…issue within one month of the issuance of the notice in the assessment proceedings. 5. Further, on the issue of internal administrative Instruction No. 1/2011 dt.31.01.2011 issued by the CBDT, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in Grindlays Bank Ltd. vs CIT in 193 ITR 457 has held that, "these provisions are really provisions of administrative convenience and it is not a case of inherent lack of jurisdiction and that in any event it is not one for adjudication by the court". Several other judgments w.r.t section 124 are also in favour of revenue; Elite Pharmaceuticals in WP No.1172/2015 dt. 23.02.2016 (Cal). Sub…

Pbn Construction Pvt. Ltd., Siliguri vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3(1), Siliguri

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

ITA 2249/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 254Section 40aSection 68

…ad simply confirmed by the assessee on the plea that the assessee did not produce the certificate in Form 26A as per Rule 31ACB of Income Tax Rules, 1962. We have also gone through the following judgment which are as follows: In Grindlays Bank vs. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 457 (Cal), the jurisdictional High Court at Calcutta had held that if the amount of tax has already been realized from the employees concerned directly, there cannot be any question of further realization of tax as the same income cannot be taxed twice. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. (2007) 293 ITR 22…

M/S. Sri Balaji Prasanna Travels, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(3)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2078/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 194Section 194CSection 194ISection 234ASection 40

…tax. According to him, it has for long been the legal position that if the payee has paid tax on his income, no recovery of any tax can be made from the person who had failed to deduct the income tax at source from such amount. In Grindlays Bank v CIT, (1992) 193 ITR 457 (Cal) decided on September 5, 1989, it was held by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court as follows at pages 469-470 of the reports: “A point has been made by the assessee that as a result of this deduction the department is realizing the tax twice on the same income. It does not appear that this point was agitated before the Tribunal. We, however, mak…

Sri. Singonahalli Chikkarevanna Gangadharaiah, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(2)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 785/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 194CSection 194C(3)Section 201Section 28Section 30Section 40

…tax. According to him, it has for long been the legal position that if the payee has paid tax on his income, no recovery of any tax can be made from the person who had failed to deduct the income tax at source from such amount. In Grindlays Bank v CIT, (1992) 193 ITR 457 (Cal) decided on September 5, 1989, it was held by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court as follows at pages 469-470 of the reports: “A point has been made by the assessee that as a result of this deduction the department is realizing the tax twice on the same income. It does not appear that this point was agitated before the Tribunal. We, however, mak…

Rh International Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(3), New Delhi

In the result appeal of Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6724/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate And Shri Himanshu Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr.D.R
Section 40

…the expenditure of assessee will 17 ITA.No.6724/Del./2018 M/s. R.H. International Ltd., New Delhi. tantamount to double taxation.  In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Grindlays Bank vs CIT [1992] 193 ITR 457 wherein their lordships have held that the tax cannot be realized twice on the same income. The relevant extract of the judgment is as below: “23. A point has been made by the assessee that as a result of this deduction the department is realizing the tax twice on the same income. It does not appear that this point was agitated before the Tribuna…

M/S Industrial Perforation India (P) Ltd, Kolkata vs. I.T.O. WD - 5(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 413/KOL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 May 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.M Das, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 194JSection 200Section 234BSection 40

…tax. According to him, it has for long been the legal position that if the payee has paid tax on his income, no recovery of any tax can be made from the person who had failed to deduct the income tax at source from such amount In Grindlays Bank v CIT, (1992) 193 ITR 457 (Cal) decided on September 5, 1989, it was held by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court as follows at pages 469-470 of the reports: "A point has been made by the assessee that as a result of this deduction the department is realizing the tax twice on the same income. It does not appear that this point was agitated before the Tribunal. We, however, ma…

Hindustan Plywood Company (Regd.), New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 145/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal

For Appellant: S/Shri Anil Kumar Gupta & Ashu Tandan, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Robin Rawal, Senior DR
Section 139Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-I’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.145/Del./2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) M/s. Hindustan Plywood Company (Regd.), vs. ITO, Ward 39 (4), D – 26, Plot No.346, Chattarpur Pahari, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 074. (PAN : AACFJ0833J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : S/Shri Anil Kumar Gupta & Ashu Tandan, CAs REVENUE BY : Shri Robin Rawal, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 17.02.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 19.02.2016 O R D E R This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT (Appeals) dated 15.10.2013.…

Grindlays Bank v. CIT (193 ITR 457) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax