Imperial Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. (1969) 74 ITR 17 (SC) M.K. Brother Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, Kanpur

125 ITR 102High Court1980#16584 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 112Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 15

Judgments citing Imperial Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. (1969) 74 ITR 17 (SC) M.K. Brother Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, Kanpur

V Ramakrishnan, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle III(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal for the A

ITA 744/CHNY/2005[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Dec 2025AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T
Section 132Section 148Section 15Section 158BSection 17(1)(iv)

…A. Nos:744 & 2197/Chny/2005 CIT, Bombay v. Sitaldas Tirathdas (1961) 41 ITR 367 (SC) CIT, W.B. v. Imperial Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. (1969) 74 ITR 17 (SC) M.K. Brother Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, Kanpur (1972) 86 ITR 38 (SC) Addl. CIT v. Rani Preetam Kunwar (1980) 125 ITR 102 (All) Tuticorin Alikali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. 227 ITR 172 (SC) As already observed, M/s PPL was liable to pay interest on the loans taken from various financial institutions. The Appellant in the capacity of Managing Director was under no legal obligation to discharge the liabilities of interest belonging to M/s PPL even though he was its…

V Ramakrishnan, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle III(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal for the A

ITA 2197/CHNY/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Dec 2025AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T
Section 132Section 148Section 15Section 158BSection 17(1)(iv)

…A. Nos:744 & 2197/Chny/2005 CIT, Bombay v. Sitaldas Tirathdas (1961) 41 ITR 367 (SC) CIT, W.B. v. Imperial Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. (1969) 74 ITR 17 (SC) M.K. Brother Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, Kanpur (1972) 86 ITR 38 (SC) Addl. CIT v. Rani Preetam Kunwar (1980) 125 ITR 102 (All) Tuticorin Alikali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. 227 ITR 172 (SC) As already observed, M/s PPL was liable to pay interest on the loans taken from various financial institutions. The Appellant in the capacity of Managing Director was under no legal obligation to discharge the liabilities of interest belonging to M/s PPL even though he was its…

The Jute Corporation of India Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2428/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 43B

…ITA No.2428/Kol/2017 The Jute Corporation of India Ltd, AY: 2011-12 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")"ी पी. एम.जगताप, उपा"य" एवं "ी ए.ट". वक","या"यक सद"य) [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No. 2428/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward-1(3), (PAN: AABCT8820B) Kolkata. Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 07.11.2019 Date of Pronouncement 10.01.2020 For the Appellant Shri B. K. Pal, AR & Shri Biswajit Shyam, FCA For the Respondent Smt. R…

ACIT, Circle - 2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 386/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…dent to the receipt of the impugned interest income in the appellant's hands. Thus, this cannot be said to be equivalent to an overriding title. This view is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Addl. CIT –vs.- Rani Pritam Kumar (1980) 125 ITR 102 (All.), wherein it was held that for diversion of income at source through an overriding title, it is necessary that payment or diversion should be under some legal obligation which should be attached with the source of income. In other words, for such a payment there should be an overriding charge, which is exacted under any law for the time bei…

West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 2(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 150/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…dent to the receipt of the impugned interest income in the appellant's hands. Thus, this cannot be said to be equivalent to an overriding title. This view is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Addl. CIT –vs.- Rani Pritam Kumar (1980) 125 ITR 102 (All.), wherein it was held that for diversion of income at source through an overriding title, it is necessary that payment or diversion should be under some legal obligation which should be attached with the source of income. In other words, for such a payment there should be an overriding charge, which is exacted under any law for the time bei…

Imperial Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. (1969) 74 ITR 17 (SC) M.K. Brother Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, Kanpur (125 ITR 102) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax