ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das

52 ITR 335Supreme Court of India1964#1110 most cited

What is ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das authority for?

The Supreme Court clarified that an appellate authority's 'finding' must be essential for disposing of the appeal for the relevant assessment year, not an incidental observation about another year's income. Appellate authorities cannot issue directions on matters not directly arising in the appeal for the specific assessment year, especially regarding escaped income, which has separate statutory mechanisms.

100

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das · 52 ITR 335 SC · Section 150 Income Tax Act · appellate authority powers · finding or direction · reassessment limitation period · Section 251 · Section 33(4) · scope of appeal order · escaped income · previous year distinct unit

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 150Section 149Section 251Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 150(1)section 150(2)section 33(4)section 150section 245hasection 147(a)true and full disclosuresection 10(2)section 34(1)section 33section 18section 148(2)

Judgments citing ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Usha Banka, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 295/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…or iv.) annul the assessment; Thus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law. The issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already been dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of…

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Subhash Chandra Banka, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 294/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…ction 153A proceeding, he “substituted” a different route (i.e Section 147) to tax that income. This exceeded the mandate of Section 250/251. 2.6.vii. Further, the present case of assessee squarely falls within the ratio of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of…

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Subhash Chandra Banka, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 293/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…or iv.) annul the assessment; Thus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law. The issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already been dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of…

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Vipul Banka, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 292/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…or iv.) annul the assessment; Thus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law. The issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already been dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of…

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Vipul Banka, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 291/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

…ction 153A proceeding, he “substituted” a different route (i.e Section 147) to tax that income. This exceeded the mandate of Section 250/251. 2.6.vii. Further, the present case of assessee squarely falls within the ratio of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of…

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Priya Dewan, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 289/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…or iv.) annul the assessment; Thus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law. The issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already been dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of…

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Priya Dewan, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 288/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…or iv.) annul the assessment; Thus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law. The issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already been dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of…

Shah Brothers, Chaibasa vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Ranchi

In the result, Revenue's appeal stands allowed partly for statistical purpose

ITA 275/RAN/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.275/Ran/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shah Brothers, Chaibasa……...................…...........................……….……Appellant Sadar Bazar, West Singhbhum, Jharkhand-833201. [Pan: Aazfs7498F] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi..…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar & R. R. Mittal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 07, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 28.11.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income U/S 139 Of The Act Declaring Total Income Of Rs.14,04,03,980/- For Assessment Year 2016-17. The Assessment Of The Assessee Was Completed U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 31.102.108 Accepting The Said Returned Income. Subsequently, Based On Information Received From Dcit, Cc-1(3), Mumbai, It Was Alleged That The Said Assessee Had Claimed A Bogus Contract Expenses Of Rs.2,69,14,526/- In Lieu Of The Bogus Work Order To M/S Pandhe Infracons Pvt. Ltd. During The F.Y 2015-16 Without Any Actual Work Had Been Performed. The Revenue Relied Upon Search Operation U/S 132 Of The Act Conducted On M/S

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 150(1)Section 250Section 251

…cheme provided under the Act. The relevant provisions for taxing the escape income are given u/s 147/263 of the Act. In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhaghubabu reported in 52 ITR 335 (SC). The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below:- "Section 33(4) of 1922 Act only refers to a finding or direction made by an appellate authority and does not itself confer any power on an appellate authority to make a finding or direction. Indeed, section 34 of 1922 Act deals with entirely a different aspect, that of empowering an…

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Animesh Agarwal, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 290/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jun 2025

…or iv.) annul the assessment; Thus, he has no power to give any direction that what is prescribed in law. The issue related to the power of the commissioner of income has already been dealt with in a decision in the case of ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) (CLC 111-128) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court underscored that the appellate provisions (Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of…

Jaiprakash L. Singh, Mumbai vs. ACIT 31(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands

ITA 1301/MUM/2024[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250

…rection to the effect of reopening and the hence the reopening of the assessment beyond six years is bad- in-law and the same is to be quashed. RELIANCE PLACED ON:- • The Hon'ble Apex Count laid down the principal in case of ITO v. MurlidharBhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) that word 'finding' can be only that which is necessary for the disposal of an appeal in respect of an assessment of a particular year and has further been held that the appellate authority may incidentally find that the income belongs to another year, but that is not finding for the disposal of an appeal in respect of the assessment year in…

ACIT, Range-I, Lucknow vs. Ci Hospitality Worldwide Private Limited, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is allowed and Cross

ITA 449/LKW/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 253(3)

…uent year cannot save the assessee from being liable for tax on income of the particular year. In this regard, we take guidance from orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sir Kikabhai Premchand vs. CIT 24 ITR 506 (SC), Income Tax Officer vs. Murlidhar Bhagwandas 52 ITR 335 (SC), CIT vs. British Paints India Ltd. (supra) and CIT v s. Basant Rai Takht Singh 1 ITR 197 (SC) for the proposition that for the purposes of assessment, every previous year is a distinct unit of time; and profits/losses made or after the relevant previous year is immaterial in assessing income of a particular year. (E.12) The learned CIT(A), i…

Sri.Parayarukandy Vettath Gangadharan, Calicut vs. The DCIT Circle-1(1), Calicut

In the result, the instant appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 157/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasparayarukandy Vettath Gangadharan Dy. Cit, Circle - 1(1) Kerala Transport Company (Decd., Calicut Vs. Represented By Lrs.) K.T.C. Building, Ymca Calicut 673001 [Pan: Adhpg8318B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar C., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 150(1)Section 153Section 2(22)(e)Section 268A

…to a series of decisions; the words used though therein being ‘any person’ as against ‘another person’ in Explanation 3 to s. 153(3). The question of vires came up again before the constitution bench of the Hon’ble Court in ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwandas [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC). The majority judgment took the view that the words "any person" in the second proviso, in the setting in which they appear, must be confined to a person intimately connected with the assessment of the year under appeal. This was on the view that the modification or setting aside of assessment made on a firm, joint Hindu family or association…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central-1 vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd

ITA/52/2024HC Delhi03 Apr 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

…r Ammal, AIR 1963 SC 1401 and in ITO, A-Ward, Sitapur v. Murlidhar Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:03.04.2024 19:31:23 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2024 & connected matters Page 75 of 179 Bhagwandas, Lakhimpur Kheri, (1964) 52 ITR 335 (SC). xxxx xxxx xxxx 16. Going back a little in point of time m J.P. Jani, ITO v. Induprasad Devshankar Bhatt, (1969) 72 ITR 595 (SC), it was held that the Income Tax Officer cannot issue notice under Section 148 of the Act, where the right to re-open an assessment was barred under the Income Tax Act, 1922 on the date when the…

The Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd., Kollam vs. The Dict, Kollam

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 96/COCH/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Mar 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasthe Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Sankaramangalam Circle - 1, Kollam Chavara, Kollam 691001 Vs. [Pan:Aaact8118R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev R., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 154Section 244A

…by, it. The proceedings under the Act, there is no gainsaying, are with reference to an assessment year, which is the unit of assessment, and for which reference, for the sake of completeness of this order, may be made to ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC); Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT [1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC); Dy. CIT v. Ace-Multi Axes System Ltd. [2018] 400 ITR 141 (SC). It was not incumbent on it to travel beyond the confines the issue before it, i.e., the admissibility of the assessee’s claim for the relevant year, and by enabling the assessee to pursue the matter under law for the current year…

M/S Citi Plaza, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 356/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…e issue of what is a 'finding' in an adjudicatory/ appellate order is no longer res integra. The Supreme Court while dealing with a provision similar to Section 150 of the Act found in Section 34(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 in ITO v/s. Murlidar Bhagwan Das 52 ITR 335 has explained the meaning of finding' thus:- A finding', therefore, can be only that which is necessary for the disposal of an appeal in respect of an assessment of a particular year. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner may hold, on the evidence, that the income shown by the assessee is not the income for the relevant year and thereby excludethat…

L & T Mhps Boilers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4765/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm L & T Mhps Boilers Private Limited Acit-2(2)(1) 2Nd Floor, L & T House, Mumbai Vs. N. M. Marg, Ballard Estate, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aabcl 2635 C (Appellant) : (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Shailja Rai &
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…e under the purview of total income as the same amounts to a future loss or profits. The ld. CIT(A) by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kikabhai Premchand vs. CIT [1953] 24 ITR 506 (SC) and ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhagwandas [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC), held that only profit and income which has been received, accrued or arisen in that year can be subjected to income tax and not future profits or losses. 4. The assessee is in appeal before us, challenging the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A). 5. It is observed that the assessee received two projects from L & T one for supply of 2*800 M V…

Shri Arun Narula, Ferozepur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Amritsar

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 14/ASR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 68Section 80C

…cheme provided under the Act. The relevant provisions for taxing the escape income are given u/s 147/263 of the Act. In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhaghubabu reported in 52 ITR 335 (SC). The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below:- “Section 33(4) of 1922 Act only refers to a finding or direction made by an appellate authority and does not itself confer any power on an appellate authority to make a finding or direction. Indeed, section 34 of 1922 Act deals with entirely a different aspect, that of empowering an…

Shri Arun Narula, Ferozepur vs. Assistant Commissioner Ofd Income Tax Central Circle, Amritsar

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 13/ASR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 68Section 80C

…cheme provided under the Act. The relevant provisions for taxing the escape income are given u/s 147/263 of the Act. In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhaghubabu reported in 52 ITR 335 (SC). The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below:- “Section 33(4) of 1922 Act only refers to a finding or direction made by an appellate authority and does not itself confer any power on an appellate authority to make a finding or direction. Indeed, section 34 of 1922 Act deals with entirely a different aspect, that of empowering an…

Shri Arun Narula, Frozepur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Amritsar

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 12/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 68Section 80C

…cheme provided under the Act. The relevant provisions for taxing the escape income are given u/s 147/263 of the Act. In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhaghubabu reported in 52 ITR 335 (SC). The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below:- “Section 33(4) of 1922 Act only refers to a finding or direction made by an appellate authority and does not itself confer any power on an appellate authority to make a finding or direction. Indeed, section 34 of 1922 Act deals with entirely a different aspect, that of empowering an…

Kings Infra Ventures Ltd, Thevara vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1 (2), Kochi

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 25/COCH/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Apr 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Sandeep Gosainkings Infra Ventures Ltd. Asstt. Commissioner Of A-1, 1St Floor, Atria Apartment Income Tax, Opp. Gurudwara Temple Vs. Circle - 1(2) Perumanur Road Kochi Thevara, Kochi [Pan:Aaccv3411D] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By: Shri Joseph Markose, Sr. Advocate Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

…Ventures Ltd. v. Asst. CIT issuing a finding and, accordingly, directing the AO for an addition (adjustment) to the income for another year, not under appeal before him. The Hon’ble Apex Court was seized with this issue in ITO vs. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das[1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) in the context of whether such a direction would be saved by the second proviso to section 34(3) of the 1922 Act, corresponding to section 150 of the Act. In the facts of that case, the assessing authority brought interest income to tax for AY 1949-50. In appeal, the first appellate authority held that in-as-much as income was received in a p…