Hon’ble Judges in Reshma Kumari & Ors. v. Madan Mohan & Anr.

9 SCC 65Reported decision2013#3871 most cited
31

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 145A(b)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263Section 56(2)(viii)

Issues it is cited on

section 141section 282a(1)section 194lasection 145a(b)section 145bsection 45(5)section 57(iv)section 56(2)(viii)section 10(37)doctrine of mergerenhanced compensationsection 197

Judgments citing Hon’ble Judges in Reshma Kumari & Ors. v. Madan Mohan & Anr.

SH. RANDHIR SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 494/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…, etc. 8.6 The multiplier method has been accepted to be sound and legally well- established principle videGeneral Manager, Kerala S.R.T.C. v. Mrs. Susamma Thomas [1994] 2 SCC 176. In Sarla Verma v. DTC [2009] 6 SCC 121 and Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan [2013] 9 SCC 65, it has been propounded that for achieving degree of uniformity in awarding compensation in motor accident claim cases, the multiplier method is required to be standardized. 8.7 Thus, be it a fatal case or an injury case, compensation includes future loss. The computation of such future loss is on the basis of the income of the deceased or the inju…

SURJEET SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 488/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…, etc. 8.6 The multiplier method has been accepted to be sound and legally well- established principle videGeneral Manager, Kerala S.R.T.C. v. Mrs. Susamma Thomas [1994] 2 SCC 176. In Sarla Verma v. DTC [2009] 6 SCC 121 and Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan [2013] 9 SCC 65, it has been propounded that for achieving degree of uniformity in awarding compensation in motor accident claim cases, the multiplier method is required to be standardized. 8.7 Thus, be it a fatal case or an injury case, compensation includes future loss. The computation of such future loss is on the basis of the income of the deceased or the inju…

SH. PARAMJEET SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 290/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…, etc. 8.6 The multiplier method has been accepted to be sound and legally well- established principle videGeneral Manager, Kerala S.R.T.C. v. Mrs. Susamma Thomas [1994] 2 SCC 176. In Sarla Verma v. DTC [2009] 6 SCC 121 and Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan [2013] 9 SCC 65, it has been propounded that for achieving degree of uniformity in awarding compensation in motor accident claim cases, the multiplier method is required to be standardized. 8.7 Thus, be it a fatal case or an injury case, compensation includes future loss. The computation of such future loss is on the basis of the income of the deceased or the inju…

DHUNI CHAND HUF,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 289/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…, etc. 8.6 The multiplier method has been accepted to be sound and legally well- established principle videGeneral Manager, Kerala S.R.T.C. v. Mrs. Susamma Thomas [1994] 2 SCC 176. In Sarla Verma v. DTC [2009] 6 SCC 121 and Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan [2013] 9 SCC 65, it has been propounded that for achieving degree of uniformity in awarding compensation in motor accident claim cases, the multiplier method is required to be standardized. 8.7 Thus, be it a fatal case or an injury case, compensation includes future loss. The computation of such future loss is on the basis of the income of the deceased or the inju…

SH. KASHMIR SINGH SANDHA,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 288/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…, etc. 8.6 The multiplier method has been accepted to be sound and legally well- established principle videGeneral Manager, Kerala S.R.T.C. v. Mrs. Susamma Thomas [1994] 2 SCC 176. In Sarla Verma v. DTC [2009] 6 SCC 121 and Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan [2013] 9 SCC 65, it has been propounded that for achieving degree of uniformity in awarding compensation in motor accident claim cases, the multiplier method is required to be standardized. 8.7 Thus, be it a fatal case or an injury case, compensation includes future loss. The computation of such future loss is on the basis of the income of the deceased or the inju…

M/S GANESH DASS HUF,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 287/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…, etc. 8.6 The multiplier method has been accepted to be sound and legally well- established principle videGeneral Manager, Kerala S.R.T.C. v. Mrs. Susamma Thomas [1994] 2 SCC 176. In Sarla Verma v. DTC [2009] 6 SCC 121 and Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan [2013] 9 SCC 65, it has been propounded that for achieving degree of uniformity in awarding compensation in motor accident claim cases, the multiplier method is required to be standardized. 8.7 Thus, be it a fatal case or an injury case, compensation includes future loss. The computation of such future loss is on the basis of the income of the deceased or the inju…

SH. ARVAIL SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 286/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…, etc. 8.6 The multiplier method has been accepted to be sound and legally well- established principle videGeneral Manager, Kerala S.R.T.C. v. Mrs. Susamma Thomas [1994] 2 SCC 176. In Sarla Verma v. DTC [2009] 6 SCC 121 and Reshma Kumari v. Madan Mohan [2013] 9 SCC 65, it has been propounded that for achieving degree of uniformity in awarding compensation in motor accident claim cases, the multiplier method is required to be standardized. 8.7 Thus, be it a fatal case or an injury case, compensation includes future loss. The computation of such future loss is on the basis of the income of the deceased or the inju…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V vs. M/S JAGADAMBA PEARLS DEALERS

The appeal is disposed of in above terms

ITTA/562/2013HC Telangana06 Jan 2025

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

Section 166

…MAC APP. No. 562/2013 Page 1 of 4 $~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 27th April, 2016 + MAC.APP. 562/2013 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. A. K. Soni, Adv. versus KAMAL VERMA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. R. P. Tomar, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT R.K.GAUBA, J (ORAL): 1. The first respondent (the claimant), then aged about 22 years, ea…

D. SURESH BABU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SANGAREDDY, MEDAK DIST.

ITTA/632/2006HC Telangana04 Sept 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

…011 in judgment dated 30.09.2013 had gone into this issue and had noted the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Smt.Sarla Verma and Ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. (2009) 6 SCC 121, Reshma Kumari & Ors. vs. Madan Mohan & Anr.(2013) 9 SCC 65 and other judgments and concluded that the Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh & Ors. vs. Rajbir Singh & Ors.(supra) has held that the future prospects should be given to persons who are self- employed or on fixed wages. This court further held that there is no conflict in the legal position as set out in the judgments of Reshma Kumari & Ors. vs…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-06 vs. NETSITY SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.

ITA/652/2016HC Delhi04 Sept 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…ration and Ors. vs. Trilok Chandra and Ors., (1996) 4 SCC 362 continues to prevail as the binding precedent. This Court, after examining the issue in light of the decisions in aforementioned cases and in the cases of Reshma Kumari vs. Madan Mohan (2013) 9 SCC 65 and noting the dicta in Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., (2005) 2 SCC 67; Safiya Bee v. Mohd. Vajahath Hussain @ Fasi, (2011) 2 SCC 94 and Union of India & Ors. v. S.K. Kapoor, (2011) 4 SCC 589, held as under:- MAC Appeal No. 652/2016 Page 3 of 5 “16. Since the decision in Tril…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CENTRAL) - 2 vs. M/S MAHESH WOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,

ITA/786/2016HC Delhi05 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

…rospects of increase in income will not be granted in cases where the deceased was “self employed” or was working on a “fixed salary”. Though this view was affirmed by a bench of three Hon’ble Judges in Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr., (2013) 9 SCC 65, on account of divergence of views, MAC Appeal No.417/16 & 786/16 Page 7 of 9 as arising from the ruling in Rajesh & Ors. vs. Rajbir & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54, the issue was later referred to a larger bench, inter-alia, by order dated 02.07.2014 in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pushpa & Ors., (2015) 9 SCC 166. 16. Aga…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. MITSUBISHI MOTORS CORPORATION

ITA/741/2016HC Delhi22 Nov 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…rospects of increase in income will not be granted in cases where the deceased was “self employed” or was working on a “fixed salary”. Though this view was affirmed by a bench of three Hon’ble Judges in Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr., (2013) 9 SCC 65, on account of divergence of views, MACA Nos.740-741/16, 743/16 & 219/17 Page 8 of 11 as arising from the ruling in Rajesh & Ors. vs. Rajbir & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54, the issue was later referred to a larger bench, inter-alia, by order dated 02.07.2014 in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pushpa & Ors., (2015) 9 SCC 166. 14…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - 8 vs. M/S SPACE POWER CONTROLS PVT. LTD.

ITA/740/2016HC Delhi21 Nov 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…rospects of increase in income will not be granted in cases where the deceased was “self employed” or was working on a “fixed salary”. Though this view was affirmed by a bench of three Hon’ble Judges in Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr., (2013) 9 SCC 65, on account of divergence of views, MACA Nos.740-741/16, 743/16 & 219/17 Page 8 of 11 as arising from the ruling in Rajesh & Ors. vs. Rajbir & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54, the issue was later referred to a larger bench, inter-alia, by order dated 02.07.2014 in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pushpa & Ors., (2015) 9 SCC 166. 14…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9 vs. VISHU IMPEX PVT LTD.

ITA/431/2016HC Delhi09 Nov 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…11. The decision in Munna Lal Jain (supra), also by a bench of three Hon’ble Judges referred, in the above context (i.e., choice of multiplier) to the earlier decision of a bench of three Hon’ble Judges reported as Reshma Kumari vs. Madan Mohan (2013) 9 SCC 65, which, in turn, was based on previous ruling of a bench of two Hon’ble Judges reported as Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121. 12. In Sarla Verma (supra), while pointing out the requisite determinates for arriving at the loss of dependency, it was observed that besides the proof of income and inf…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-O1 vs. ACTIS GLOBAL SERVICES PVT. LTD ..,

ITA/417/2016HC Delhi05 Aug 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…rospects of increase in income will not be granted in cases where the deceased was “self employed” or was working on a “fixed salary”. Though this view was affirmed by a bench of three Hon’ble Judges in Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr., (2013) 9 SCC 65, on account of divergence of views, MAC Appeal No.417/16 & 786/16 Page 7 of 9 as arising from the ruling in Rajesh & Ors. vs. Rajbir & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54, the issue was later referred to a larger bench, inter-alia, by order dated 02.07.2014 in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pushpa & Ors., (2015) 9 SCC 166. 16. Aga…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-07 vs. M/S ONKARESHWAR PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,

ITA/287/2016HC Delhi03 May 2016

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

…rospects of increase in income will not be granted in cases where the deceased was “self employed” or was working on a “fixed salary”. Though this view was affirmed by a bench of three Hon’ble Judges in Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr., (2013) 9 SCC 65, on account of divergence of views, as arising from the ruling in Rajesh & Ors. vs. Rajbir & Ors., (2013) 9 SCC 54, the issue was later referred to a larger bench, inter-alia, by order dated 02.07.2014 in National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pushpa & Ors., (2015) 9 SCC 166. 15. Against the above backdrop, by judgment dated 22.01.2016 passe…

Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Dredging Corporation of India Limited

The appeals are disposed of with directions as above

ITTA/345/2008HC Telangana23 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

…09,000/-. 10. Since Injured was not in permanent employment and there are no income tax returns to assess the loss of future prospects, therefore, in view of Three Judge Bench decision of Supreme Court in Reshma Kumari & Ors. v. Madan Mohan & Anr. (2013) 9 SCC 65, the compensation of ₹1,50,000/- granted under this head is disallowed. Such a view is taken as Supreme Court in Sandeep Khanuja v. Atul Dande, 2017 SCC Online SC has reiterated that multiplier method takes care of future prospects in case of persons not in permanent employment. 11. Grant of compensation of ₹75,000/- under the head of ‘pain a…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV vs. DANGSON HOTEL & RESTAURANTS PVT. LTD.

ITA/881/2015HC Delhi18 Nov 2015

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

…come altogether.” 34. Taking note of the evolving jurisprudence on the subject, in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2009) 6 SCC 121, which was affirmed by a bench of three Hon‟ble Judges in Reshma Kumari & Ors. Vs. Madan Mohan & Anr., (2013) 9 SCC 65, the Supreme Court held thus : “16. … “Just compensation” is adequate compensation which is fair and equitable, on the facts and circumstances of the case, to make good the loss suffered as a result of the wrong, as far as money can do so, by applying the well settled principles relating to award of compensation. It is not intended to b…

PR. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX (TDS)-I vs. M/S CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES

The appeals stand disposed of in above terms

ITA/306/2015HC Delhi13 Oct 2015

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

…MAC APP. No. 147/2007 etc. Page 1 of 27 $~R-15 to 30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 28th April, 2016 + MAC.APP. 147/2007 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant versus HARBHAJAN KAUR AND ORS. ..... Respondents + MAC.APP. 303/2015 THE HIND SAMACHAR LTD. (DELHI UNIT) ..... Appellant versus NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Respondent + MAC.APP. 148/2007 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appell…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHALIMAR CHEMICAL WORKS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 892/KOL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Sept 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shrimahavir Singhand Shriwaseem Ahmedassessment Year :2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…, Revenue preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 4. We have heard rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. Before us Ld. DR supported the order of AO and cited the case lawState of Maharashtra v. Sarvodya Printing Press Fine Art (1999) 9 SCC 65 wherein it was held that supply of printed material was a works contract. ITA No.892/Kol/2011 A.Y. 2008-09 DCIT Cir-10, Kol. v. Shalimar Chemical Works Ltd. Page 4 Whereas Ld. AR submitted that the circular No. 681 dated 08.03.1994 in the contest of Sec. 194C of the Act, wherein in terms of clause(b) of sub-clause (6) of clause (7) it is mentioned…

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2