Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co.

361 ELT 577Supreme Court of India2018#12688 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 115JCSection 131(d)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 115jcsection 80ib(10)project completion methodfull and true disclosuresection 80ibsection 65assistant directorsection 80iinterest u/s 234aadmission of additional evidenceadvance taxfurnishing inaccurate particulars

Judgments citing Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co.

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

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

ITA 1637/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…records department. 16. At this juncture, it would be relevant to take note of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, relied by the Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577/2018] 9 SCC 1. The Constitution Bench was set up to examine the correctness of the ratio in Sun Export Corpn. v Collector of Customs 1997 taxmann.com 696/1997 (93) ELT. 641 (SC)/([1997] 6 SCC 564 and the question posed before it was- "What is the interpretative rule to be applied while interpreting a tax exemption provision/notification when ther…

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

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

ITA 1636/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…records department. 16. At this juncture, it would be relevant to take note of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, relied by the Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577/2018] 9 SCC 1. The Constitution Bench was set up to examine the correctness of the ratio in Sun Export Corpn. v Collector of Customs 1997 taxmann.com 696/1997 (93) ELT. 641 (SC)/([1997] 6 SCC 564 and the question posed before it was- "What is the interpretative rule to be applied while interpreting a tax exemption provision/notification when ther…

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

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

ITA 1635/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…records department. 16. At this juncture, it would be relevant to take note of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, relied by the Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577/2018] 9 SCC 1. The Constitution Bench was set up to examine the correctness of the ratio in Sun Export Corpn. v Collector of Customs 1997 taxmann.com 696/1997 (93) ELT. 641 (SC)/([1997] 6 SCC 564 and the question posed before it was- "What is the interpretative rule to be applied while interpreting a tax exemption provision/notification when ther…

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

ITA 1634/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…records department. 16. At this juncture, it would be relevant to take note of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, relied by the Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577/2018] 9 SCC 1. The Constitution Bench was set up to examine the correctness of the ratio in Sun Export Corpn. v Collector of Customs 1997 taxmann.com 696/1997 (93) ELT. 641 (SC)/([1997] 6 SCC 564 and the question posed before it was- "What is the interpretative rule to be applied while interpreting a tax exemption provision/notification when ther…

M/S. City Corporation Limited, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

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

ITA 528/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora & Saukhya LakadeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 80I

…l (2023) 147 taxmann.com 53 (Pune Tribunal) wherein the Hon. ITAT, Pune bench after following the decision of Constitutional Bench of Hon Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577/[2018] 9 SCC 1 has held that the assessee has to strictly satisfy the conditions as prescribed in the section 80IB(10) and in case of any doubt or ambiguity, the benefit of interpretation has to be given in favour of the Revenue. The relevant portion of the said decisions of Hon. Pune Tribunal is as under- 16. At this juncture, it would be releva…

M/S. City Corporation Limited, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

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

ITA 527/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora & Saukhya LakadeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 80I

…l (2023) 147 taxmann.com 53 (Pune Tribunal) wherein the Hon. ITAT, Pune bench after following the decision of Constitutional Bench of Hon Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577/[2018] 9 SCC 1 has held that the assessee has to strictly satisfy the conditions as prescribed in the section 80IB(10) and in case of any doubt or ambiguity, the benefit of interpretation has to be given in favour of the Revenue. The relevant portion of the said decisions of Hon. Pune Tribunal is as under- 16. At this juncture, it would be releva…

The Pr.Commissioner of vs. M/S Mahaveer Tuscan

ITA/423/2017HC Karnataka05 Feb 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 260Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…account of Legislature's failure to express itself clearly. The aforesaid principles were referred to with approval by another constitution bench decision of Supreme Court in ‘COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) MUMBAI VS. DILIP KUMAR AND COMPANY’, (2018) 361 ELT 577 (SC). 13. It is equally well settled legal proposition that exemption is available on complying with certain conditions, those conditions have to be strictly complied with. [See: ‘EAGLE FLASK INDUSTRIES LTD., VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE’, (2004) 7 SCC 377 AND ‘STATE OF JHARKHAND VS. ANBAY CEMENTS’, (2005…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Brigade Enterprises Ltd

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/54/2013HC Karnataka22 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260Section 260ASection 80I

…ure's failure to express itself clearly. The aforesaid principles were referred to with approval by another constitution bench decision of Supreme Court in ‘COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS 23 (IMPORT) MUMBAI VS. DILIP KUMAR AND COMPANY’, (2018) 361 ELT 577 (SC). 13. It is equally well settled legal proposition that exemption is available on complying with certain conditions, those conditions have to be strictly complied with. [See: ‘EAGLE FLASK INDUSTRIES LTD., VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE’, (2004) 7 SCC 377 AND ‘STATE OF JHARKHAND VS. ANBAY CEMENTS’, (2005) 1 SCC 368, ‘STATE OF BIH…

Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. (361 ELT 577) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax