Hemalatha Gargya v. CIT

259 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2003#5106 most cited

What is Hemalatha Gargya v. CIT authority for?

Dismissal of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) by the Supreme Court does not operate as a confirmation of the reasoning or ratio decidendi of the High Court's decision. The judgment of the High Court does not merge with the order of dismissal.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Hemalatha Gargya v. CIT · dismissal of SLP · no merger of judgment · confirmation of reasoning · order refusing special leave · appeals · limitation

Also reported as

128 Taxmann 190

Sections most often in play

Section 10(20A)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 11(6)Section 115TDSection 12Section 12ASection 12AA
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 10(20a)section 4asection 10(46)section 11(6)advancement of general public utilitysection 58stay petitionsection 55section 13(3)section 13(1)(c)section 144aproviso to section 2(15)

Judgments citing Hemalatha Gargya v. CIT

Moradabad Development Authority, Moradabad vs. ACIT(Exemption), Lucknow

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 4631/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Alka Gautam, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 144ASection 2(15)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.4631 & 4632/Del/2017 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Moradabad Development Authority, Vs. ACIT (Exemption), Kanth Road, Near Vivekanand Lucknow. Hospital, Moradabad (UP). PAN: AAJFM7731M (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : Shri Piyush Kaushik, Advocate Department By : Ms Alka Gautam, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 03.01.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 04.01.2018 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: These two appeals filed by the assessee relate to the assessment…

M/S Tejas Networks Limited vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

WP/7004/2014HC Karnataka24 Apr 2015

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 35Section 35(1)(i)

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF APRIL, 2015 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.7004/2014 (T-IT) BETWEEN: M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: PLOT NO.25, 5TH CROSS, J.P. SOFTWARE PARK ELECTRONIC CITY, PHASE-1, HOSUR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 100 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. SANJAY NAYAK S/O SRI. SHANKAR NAYAK AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI N VENKATARAMAN, Sr.COUNSEL A/W SRI…

The Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Pvt Ltd

The appeals are allowed

ITA/160/2012HC Karnataka05 Jul 2012

Bench: B.MANOHAR,D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR

Section 253Section 254Section 260A

…isions referred to above also cannot stand to reason, as it is only following the binding decision of the High Court. 9 11. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of HEMALATHA GARGYA vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [(2003) 259 ITR 1] to submit that the tribunal, a creator of the statute, does not have powers to pass orders contrary to the statutory provisions. 12. Reliance is also placed on a Single Bench decision of this court in the case of MAGILAL S JAIN vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME & ANOTHER [(2004) 267 ITR 693]. 13. On the contrary, submissions of Sri Chaithanya K K and Sr…