How many judgments cite (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers?

131 judgments on BharatTax cite (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers (3 SCC 57), spanning 2013 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 144C(13), Section 153(4), Section 153(1), Section 143(3), Section 153, Section 144B.

(ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers

3 SCC 57Reported decision2003#777 most cited

What is (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers authority for?

Courts must reject interpretations that defeat the plain intention of the legislature, even if language is imprecise. A statute must be read as a whole, construing provisions harmoniously to avoid rendering any part otiose or a dead letter.

131

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,514 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers · interpretation of statutes · plain intention of legislature · harmonious construction · purposive interpretation · avoid dead letter · Section 143(3) · Section 153A

Also reported as

2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226

Sections most often in play

Section 144C(13)Section 153(4)Section 153(1)Section 143(3)Section 153 Section 144B Section 144C Section 153(2A)

Issues it is cited on

section 144cof section 158ab section 261 section 11(3)section 153(4)section 144c(4)section 22(1)stay of demand reference to tpo section 140 section 21 section 153(1)

Judgments citing (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers

Avaya India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, NFAC, Not Available

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 4290/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at Avaya India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. A.O./NFAC p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889)…

Airbnb Payments India Private Limited, Gurugram, Haryana vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Gurugram, Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4263/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalairbnb Payments India Private Dcit, Circle-1(1), Limited, Gurugram, Haryana. Level 9, Spaze I Tech Park, Vs A1 Tower, Sector-49, . Sohna Road, Gurugram-122018 Haryana. Pan-Aanca6203B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Reema Grewal, Ca Department By Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23/01/2026 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By Ao Dated 18.07.2024 U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” In Short) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Subsequent To The Direction Of The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) Vide Direction Dated 24.06.2024. 2. The Assessee Raised Ground No. 2 Contending That The Final Assessment Order Dated 18/07/2024 Passed By The A.O. Is Time Barred By Limitation & Is Bad In Law, As It Has Been Passed Beyond The Time Frame Prescribed Under Section 153(1) Read With Section 153(4) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' For Short). The Ld. Assessee’S Representative Relying On Airbnb Payments India Private Limited Vs. Dcit The Ratio Laid Down By The Hon'Ble High Court Of Madras In The Case Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax Vs. Roca Bathroom Products (P.) Ltd. [2022] 445 Itr 537 (Madras) & Also Plethora Of Orders Passed By The Co-Ordinate Bench Of The Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench Sought For Allowing The Ground No. 2 Of The Assessee.

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

At and T Communication Services India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Office of ACIT, Cr Building, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4257/DEL/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose." (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may besomes inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Genpact India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 4115/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalgenpact India Private Limited Vs Assessment Unit, Income 12A, Ground Floor,K Prakash Tax Department, 2Nd Floor, Deep Building 7 Tolstoy Marg, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Baroda House, S.O. Baroda Stadium, New Delhi House, Delhi Pan: Aabce4461B Appellant Respondent Genpact India Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner Of 12A, Ground Floor, Prakash Income Tax (Osd), Range-10 Deep Building 7 Tolstoy Marg, Central Revenue Building, Baroda House, S.O. Baroda Ito, New Delhi-110002 House, Delhi Pan: Aabce4461B Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv (Virtual) &Ms.Vyushtirawat, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Fmi Automotive Components Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Circle 7(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 3838/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Triumph Motorcycles (India) Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 794/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwaltriumph Motorcycles (India) Vs The Pvt. Ltd. 2Nd Floor, Wing-A Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assista Radisson Blu Plaza, Nh-8, Nt Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mahipalpur, New Delhi Nfac, New Delhi Pan: Aaect1592M Appellant Respondent Assessee By Dr. Shaswat Bajpai, Adv (Virtual), Sh. Mayank Chaturvedi, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Fmi Automotive Components Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle 7(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2356/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Amplus Kn Solar Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward- 2(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2315/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalampluskn Solar Private Limited Vs Ito 6Th Floor, The Palm Square, Golf Ward-2(1), C. R. Building, Course Extension Road, Sector - New Delhi 66, Grugaon, Haryana Pan: Aapca3377G Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Km Gupta, Adv, Ms.Shruti Khimta, Ar & Sh. Jaskaran Singh, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)Section 158A

…one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. 16 Amplus KN Solar (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Claas Agricultural Machinery Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 4(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4563/DEL/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a "dead letter" or "useless lumber" is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose." (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Itron India Private Limited, Noida vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4389/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalitron India Private Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner C-7, Sector-3, Noida Gautam Of Income Tax, Circle 10(1), Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh C. R. Building, I. P. Estate, Pan: Aabcs6575L New Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Kashish Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Xl India Business Services Private Limited, Delhi vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4332/DEL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Lintec India Private Limited, South Delhi, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 13(1), Office of DCIT, Cr Building, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4282/DEL/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwallintec India Private Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of 14Th Floor, Eros Corporate Tower, Income Tax, Circle 13(1), Nehru Place, South Delhi, Delhi Office Of The Dcit, C. R. 110019, Building, Delhi Pan: Aaccl23772F Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Supriya Mehta, Ca Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Al Maha Foods International Private Limited, New Delhi vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre (Jao - DCIT Circle 1(1), Delhi), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3974/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalal Maha Foods International Vs National Faceless Private Limited, 1122, Dlf Assessment Centre (Jao- Tower A, Jasola, New Friends Dcit Circle 1(1), C. R. Colony, S.O. Zakir Nagar, Building, I. P. Estate, Delhi Delhi-110025 New Delhi Pan: Aabca8743L Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv& Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 153Section 153(1)

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Teva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Industries India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-25(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4197/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalteva Pharmaceutical & Chemical Vs Assessment Unit, Income Industries India Private Limited, Tax Department/Deputy 8Th Floor, C-Wing Time Square, Commissioner Of Income Andherikurla Road, Marol Naka, Tax, Circle 25(1), Opp Mittal Industrial Estate C. R. Building, Delhi- Andheri (E), Mumbai 400059, 110001 Maharashtra, India Pan: Bnspk7225H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Sachit Jolly, Sr. Adv, Sh. Sohamdua, Adv& Sh. Abhiudaya Shankar Bajpai, Adv Revenue By Sh. S. K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Final Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153r

…d that an interpretation which reduces one of the provisions as a “dead letter” or “useless lumber” is not harmonious construction. (5) To harmonise is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it otiose.” (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 : 2002 SCC OnLine SC 1226: “16. The courts will have to reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. (See Salmon v. Duncombe [(1886) 11 AC 627 : 55 LJPC 69 : 55 LT 446 (PC)] AC at p. 634, Curtis v. Stovin[(1889) 22 QBD 513 : 58 LJQB 174 : 60 LT 772…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Limited

The appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-010586-010589 - 2025Supreme Court08 Aug 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 44B

…reduced to a futility, and the interpretation must ordinarily be such that it brings about an effective result which was intended by the Legislature. The Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57, has held as under:- "14. A construction which reduces the statute to a futility has to be avoided. A statute or any enacting provision therein must be so construed as to make it effective and operative on the principle expressed in the maxim ut res magis valeat quam pereat i.e. a liberal construction should be put upon written instruments, s…

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 237/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

…ated. That it is always presumed that the legislature would not take away with one hand what it gives with the other. In support of the above, reliance is placed on the decision of this Court in the case of CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers [2003] 126 Taxman 321/3 SCC 57 (paras 17 to 21). 4.9 It is submitted that even otherwise the power to legislate includes the power to legislate retrospectively. That it is well settled that the legislature is well competent to legislate retrospectively. That though, retrospectivity of an enactment may not be presumed, the same can be done through express enactment or by necessary…

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 236/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

ITA 235/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 234/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

Income Tax Officer vs. Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia

C.A. No.-000911-000911 - 2022Supreme Court06 Apr 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

…lways presumed that the legislature would not take away with one hand what it gives with the other. In support of the above, reliance is placed on the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57 (paras 17 to 21). 4.9 It is submitted that even otherwise the power to legislate includes the power to legislate retrospectively. That it is well settled that the legislature is well competent to legislate retrospectively. That though, retrospectivity of an enactment may not be presumed, the same can be done through express enactment or b…