Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT

64 ITR 456High Court1966#9849 most cited

What is Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT authority for?

For a precedent to be binding, there must be a conscious consideration of the issue involved. The 'date of regular assessment' is relevant for determining interest payable or receivable by the assessee.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT · 64 ITR 456 · binding precedent · conscious consideration · date of regular assessment · interest payable · interest receivable · sections 214 · 215 · 243 · 244

Issues it is cited on

compensatory interestsection 243section 262section 2(40)section 89section 208section 210section 115jaasection 140asection 10(1)section 90asection 28(iv)

Judgments citing Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT

Smt.Ramani.Radhakrishnan, Ernakulam vs. The ACIT Central Circle 2, Ernakulam

ITA 219/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 250

…ith the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Ramani Radhakrishnan. Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

Smt.Ramani.Radhakrishnan, Ernakulam vs. The ACIT Central Circle 2, Ernakulam

ITA 218/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Aug 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 250

…ith the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Ramani Radhakrishnan. Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

Smt.Ramani.Radhakrishnan, Ernakulam vs. The ACIT Central Circle 2, Ernakulam

ITA 217/COCH/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Aug 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 250

…ith the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Ramani Radhakrishnan. Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

Santhimadam Agrofarm Trust, Kochi vs. The ACIT Central Circle 2, Kochi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 223/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

…nce though, we agree with the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

Santhimadam Agrofarm Trust, Kochi vs. The ACIT Central Circle 2, Kochi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 222/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

…nce though, we agree with the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

Santhimadam Agrofarm Trust, Kochi vs. The ACIT Central Circle 2, Kochi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 221/COCH/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

…nce though, we agree with the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

Santhimadam Agrofarm Trust, Kochi vs. The ACIT Central Circle 2, Kochi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 220/COCH/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

…nce though, we agree with the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

M/S Santhimadom Ayurnikethan Health Resort & Research Institute Trust, Kochi vs. ACIT Central Circle -2, Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 919/COCH/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…nce though, we agree with the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

M/S Santhimadom Ayurnikethan Health Resort & Research Institute Trust, Kochi vs. ACIT Central Circle 2, Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 918/COCH/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…nce though, we agree with the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

M/S Santhimadom Ayurnikethan Health Resort & Research Institute Trust, Kochi vs. ACIT Central Circle -2, Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 917/COCH/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 May 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…nce though, we agree with the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

M/S Santhimadom Ayurnikethan Health Resort & Research Institute Trust, Ernakulam vs. ACIT Central Circle-2, Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 916/COCH/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 May 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…nce though, we agree with the assessee, is misplaced. As explained in CIT vs. Prakash Chand Lunia [2023] 454 ITR 61 (SC), for a precedent to be binding there has to be a conscious consideration of an issue involved (also see: Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT [1966] 64 ITR 456 (Cal)). The decision in Modi Industries Ltd. (supra), however, settles the issue qua the ‘date of regular assessment’, clarifying it to be for the purpose of determination of interest payable to or, as the case may be, by the assessee, i.e., ss. 214, 215, also adverting to ss. 243 and 244 of the Act. The said provisions are no longer operative, wi…

Hussain Bhai & Ors. v. CIT (64 ITR 456) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax