Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT

63 ITR 232Supreme Court of India1967#712 most cited

What is Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) cannot permit a new ground requiring fresh investigation of facts unless it remands the matter or requests a report from the lower appellate authority. The ITAT possesses the power to remand or remit cases back to the authorities below in appropriate circumstances.

142

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT · 63 ITR 232 · ITAT appellate powers · fresh investigation of facts · power to remand · Income Tax Appellate Tribunal · remand to lower authorities · new grounds of appeal · Section 143(3) · Section 148

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 143(3)Section 144ASection 40A(3)Section 119Section 147
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 274(2)section 243section 245hacasus omissussection 245csettlement applicationsection 245d(4)section 153(4)section 153(a)section 144basection 245dsection 244

Judgments citing Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT

Ifci Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Appeal is dismissed

ITA - 1931 / 2010HC Delhi30 Sept 2011
Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

…rovision for doubtful debts out of which `50 Crores was disallowed and, therefore, there had to be accumulative discussion, the issue was specifically raised by the assessee itself before the Tribunal. (See Hukumchand Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT, Central, Bombay, 63 ITR 232, Auto and Metal Engineers and Others Vs. Union of India and Others, 229 ITR 383 and The Assam Tribune Vs. CIT & Another, 285 ITR 452]. Furthermore, it would be relevant to point out that the legal position stated in Para 16 by the Tribunal is correct in law and even the assessee is not in a position to dislodge the same. It is for this rea…

Mcorp Global Pvt. Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, the civil appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed with no order as to costs

C.A. No.-000955-000955 - 2009Supreme Court12 Feb 2009

Bench: Coming To The Facts, The Following Is The Relationship Between The Parties: - M/S Glass & Ceramic Decorators Was The Manufacturer Of Soft Drink Bottles. - Assessee Was The ‘Lessor’. - M/S Coolade Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Was The ‘Lessee’. 4. During The Relevant Assessment Year, The Assessee Carried On The Business Of Trading In Lamination Machines & Binding & Punching Machines. In Addition, It Was Also Engaged In The Leasing Business. During The Year In Question, The Assessee Had Bought 5,46,000 Soft Drink Bottles From M/S Glass & Ceramic Decorators Worth Rs. 19,54,953/-. The Bottles Were Directly Supplied To M/S Coolade Beverages Pvt. Ltd. (“M/S Coolade” For Short) In Terms Of Lease Dated 15.2.1991. Vide Assessment Order Dated 28.3.1994, The Ao Found That M/S Coolade Had Received Only 42,000 Bottles Out Of The Total Of 2

Section 254(1)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 33(4)

…first round. In other words, the AO allowed depreciation in respect of both the transactions amounting to Rs. 1,32,08,795 as against the claim of Rs. 1,80,30,489/-. Findings: 6. In the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT reported in (1967) 63 ITR 232 this Court has held that under Section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (equivalent to Section 254(1) of the 1961 Act), the Tribunal was not authorized to take back the benefit granted to the assessee by the AO. The Tribunal has no power to enhance the assessment. Applying the ratio of the said judgment to the present case, we are of the view tha…