Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT

82 ITR 913Supreme Court of India1971#431 most cited
209

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2000 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT · Section 269SS penalty · Section 269T penalty · Section 271D penalty · Section 271E penalty · cash transactions penalty · literal interpretation tax law · legislative intent tax · income deemed assessee's · definition of relative

Also reported as

49 Taxmann 87

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 131(1A)Section 132ASection 269SSSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

Issues it is cited on

section 5(8)closely held companyprincipal director general of income-taxaccumulated profitssection 292bsection 292bbsection 260section 260asection 282section 292section 119section 29

Judgments citing Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT

Imperial Consultants & Securities Ltd. (Formerly Known As Omperial Consultants & Securities Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT -6 (3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3529/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Rajesh Kumarm/S. Imperial Consultants & Dcit, Circle - 6(3)(1) Securities Ltd. Room No. 506, 5Th Floor (Formerly Imperial Consultants & Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Securities P. Ltd) Vs. Mumbai 400020 Manickam Complex, Gr. Floor 1/3, General Paters Roadchennai 600002 Pan – Aaacg4413G Appellant Respondent Dcit, Circle - 6(3)(1) M/S. Imperial Consultants & Room No. 506, 5Th Floor Securities Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Essar House, 11, Kk Marg Mumbai 400020 Mahalaxmi, Mumbai 400034 Pan – Aaacg4413G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 36(1)(iii)Section 56Section 57

…ting the excess of the interest expenditure of Rs.143.30 crores on ZCBs over the interest income of Rs.124.58 crores. In support of this proposition, the appellant relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Keshavji Ravji & Co. Vs. CIT 183 ITR 1. However, on careful perusal of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by the appellant, it is seen that the same is distinguishable on facts and therefore not applicable to the facts of the appellant's case. In the said case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court dealt with the issue of disallowance of interest paid to the partners of a firm on…

Religare Capital Markets Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1763/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1583/Del/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) ITA No. 1763/Del/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Religare Capital Markets Limited, Vs. DCIT, D3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, Circle-15(1), New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AADCR5200R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr Advoate Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv Revenue by: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing 16/07/2019 Date of pronouncement 10/10/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an a…

M/S Religare Capital Markets Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1881/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: PendingITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1583/Del/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) ITA No. 1763/Del/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Religare Capital Markets Limited, Vs. DCIT, D3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, Circle-15(1), New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AADCR5200R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr Advoate Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv Revenue by: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing 16/07/2019 Date of pronouncement 10/10/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an a…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati vs. M/S. Numaligarh Refinery Ltd., Guwahati

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 278/GTY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR
Section 80

…n the question arising consideration, it will not be open to a court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. The Apex Court in case of KeshavjiRavji& Co Vs CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1(SC) has observed in para 13 of the order that the Board cannot pre-empt a judicial interpretation of the scope and ambit of a provision of the Act by issuing Circulars on the subject. This is too obvious a proposition to require any argument for it. A circular cannot even impose on the tax payer a burden higher than what the Act itself, on a true i…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 03, Guwahati vs. Numaligarh Refinery Limited, Guwahati

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 28/GTY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR
Section 80

…n the question arising consideration, it will not be open to a court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. The Apex Court in case of KeshavjiRavji& Co Vs CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1(SC) has observed in para 13 of the order that the Board cannot pre-empt a judicial interpretation of the scope and ambit of a provision of the Act by issuing Circulars on the subject. This is too obvious a proposition to require any argument for it. A circular cannot even impose on the tax payer a burden higher than what the Act itself, on a true i…

Numaligarh Refinery Limited, Guwahati vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 03, Guwahati

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 27/GTY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR
Section 80

…n the question arising consideration, it will not be open to a court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. The Apex Court in case of KeshavjiRavji& Co Vs CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1(SC) has observed in para 13 of the order that the Board cannot pre-empt a judicial interpretation of the scope and ambit of a provision of the Act by issuing Circulars on the subject. This is too obvious a proposition to require any argument for it. A circular cannot even impose on the tax payer a burden higher than what the Act itself, on a true i…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati vs. M/S. Numaligarh Refinery Ltd., Guwahati

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 98/GTY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR
Section 80

…n the question arising consideration, it will not be open to a court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. The Apex Court in case of KeshavjiRavji& Co Vs CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1(SC) has observed in para 13 of the order that the Board cannot pre-empt a judicial interpretation of the scope and ambit of a provision of the Act by issuing Circulars on the subject. This is too obvious a proposition to require any argument for it. A circular cannot even impose on the tax payer a burden higher than what the Act itself, on a true i…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati vs. M/S. Numaligarh Refinery Ltd., Guwahati

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 97/GTY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR
Section 80

…n the question arising consideration, it will not be open to a court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. The Apex Court in case of KeshavjiRavji& Co Vs CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1(SC) has observed in para 13 of the order that the Board cannot pre-empt a judicial interpretation of the scope and ambit of a provision of the Act by issuing Circulars on the subject. This is too obvious a proposition to require any argument for it. A circular cannot even impose on the tax payer a burden higher than what the Act itself, on a true i…

M/S. Numaligarh Refinery Ltd., Guwahati vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 90/GTY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR
Section 80

…n the question arising consideration, it will not be open to a court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. The Apex Court in case of KeshavjiRavji& Co Vs CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1(SC) has observed in para 13 of the order that the Board cannot pre-empt a judicial interpretation of the scope and ambit of a provision of the Act by issuing Circulars on the subject. This is too obvious a proposition to require any argument for it. A circular cannot even impose on the tax payer a burden higher than what the Act itself, on a true i…

M/S. Numaligarh Refinery Ltd., Guwahati vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 89/GTY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR
Section 80

…n the question arising consideration, it will not be open to a court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. The Apex Court in case of KeshavjiRavji& Co Vs CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1(SC) has observed in para 13 of the order that the Board cannot pre-empt a judicial interpretation of the scope and ambit of a provision of the Act by issuing Circulars on the subject. This is too obvious a proposition to require any argument for it. A circular cannot even impose on the tax payer a burden higher than what the Act itself, on a true i…

M/S. Numaligarh Refinery Ltd., Guwahati vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 8/GTY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR
Section 80

…n the question arising consideration, it will not be open to a court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. The Apex Court in case of KeshavjiRavji& Co Vs CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1(SC) has observed in para 13 of the order that the Board cannot pre-empt a judicial interpretation of the scope and ambit of a provision of the Act by issuing Circulars on the subject. This is too obvious a proposition to require any argument for it. A circular cannot even impose on the tax payer a burden higher than what the Act itself, on a true i…

M/S. Numaligarh Refinery Ltd., Guwahati vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 7/GTY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR
Section 80

…n the question arising consideration, it will not be open to a court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. The Apex Court in case of KeshavjiRavji& Co Vs CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1(SC) has observed in para 13 of the order that the Board cannot pre-empt a judicial interpretation of the scope and ambit of a provision of the Act by issuing Circulars on the subject. This is too obvious a proposition to require any argument for it. A circular cannot even impose on the tax payer a burden higher than what the Act itself, on a true i…

M/S. Numaligarh Refinery Ltd., Guwahati vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati

In the result, appeals of the assessee in I

ITA 5/GTY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessee`S Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Jayanta Dutta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sarma, DR
Section 80

…n the question arising consideration, it will not be open to a court to direct that a circular should be given effect to and not the view expressed in a decision of the Supreme Court or the High Court. The Apex Court in case of KeshavjiRavji& Co Vs CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1(SC) has observed in para 13 of the order that the Board cannot pre-empt a judicial interpretation of the scope and ambit of a provision of the Act by issuing Circulars on the subject. This is too obvious a proposition to require any argument for it. A circular cannot even impose on the tax payer a burden higher than what the Act itself, on a true i…

Income Tax Officer 20(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mehmood Khan Haji Babu Khan, Mumbai

ITA 4862/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Satish ModiFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…by looking into the object and scheme of the Act and the legislative intendment would arise, in our opinion, if the language of the statute is either ambiguous or conflicting or gives a meaning leading to absurdity.” In the case of Keshavji Ravji & Co. v. CIT 183 ITR 1, the Apex Court observed as under: “….. As long as there is no ambiguity in the statutory language, resort to any interpretative process to unfold the legislative intent becomes impermissible. The supposed intention of the Legislature cannot then be appealed to whittle down the statutory language which is otherwise unambiguous. If the intendment is…

Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT TDS 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 6625/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor &For Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar
Section 194BSection 201Section 201(1)

…be. It was contended that the CBDT Circulars are binding on the Departmental authorities, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of K.P.Verghese vs. 5 Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 and Ellerman Lines Ltd. vs. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 913. In fact, the very same Circular No. 240 dated 17.05.1978 came up for consideration before the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Investment Trust of India Ltd. (2003) 264 ITR 506 (Mad) and it was held to be binding on the Departmental authorities. Accordingly, it has been explained that in view of the Circular of CBDT dated 17.05.1978 (supr…

Futuristic Sales Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Prcit (Central), Gurugram

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

ITA 1043/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[A.Y 2009-10] M/S Futuristic Sales [P] Ltd Vs. The Pr. C.I.T Flat No. 97, Sfs, First Floor Central Ashok Vihar, Phase – Iv Gurgaon New Delhi Pan No: Aaacf 6597 N [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 148Section 263

…ed income under undue pressure/coercion shall be viewed by the Board of adversely.” 8.4.1 It is submitted, that instructions of CBDT are binding as has been held in the following judicial pronouncements: 56 ITR 198 (SC) Navnit Lai C. Javeri vs. K. K. Sen i) 82 ITR 913 (SC) Ellerman Linces Ltd. vs. C1T ii) 237 ITR 889 (SC) CIT vs. UCO Bank Ltd. iii) 247 ITR 128 (SC)Taper Products Ltd. vs. Commissioner of iv) Central Excise 131 ITR 597 (SC) K. P. Varghese vs. ITO v) 183 ITR 1 (SC) Keshavji Ravji and Co. vs. CIT vi) 252 ITR 1 (SC) CIT vs. Anjum M. H. Ghaswala vii) It would be evident from the aforesaid instruc…

Shri Harishbhai Keshavlal Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-7, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1180/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1180/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2006-2007

Section 250

…n. Page 9 of 14 Asstt. Years 2006-07 10 8.3 We also note that the circulars issued by the CBDT which are beneficial to the assessee are binding on the Tribunal as held by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Keshavji Ravji & Co.v. CIT [1990] 183 ITR 1/49 Taxman 87 wherein it was observed as under: “The task of interpretation of the laws is the exclusive domain of the courts. However, - this is what Shri Ramachandran really has in mind -circulars beneficial to the assessees and which tone down the rigour of the law issued in exercise of the statutory power under section 119 of the Act or under co…

Smt. Birma Devi, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated

ITA 678/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54B

…) 104 DTR (Guj) 169 CIT(A) and ITAT are competent to entertain any laful claimed which the assessee failed to claim in the return before the Assessing Officer. (v) Anju Mittal v/s ACIT. (ITAT JP) - ITA 201/JP/2014 dt 30.04.15 (vi) Keshavji Ramji v/s CIT (SC) 183 ITR 1 (vii) J.P. Boder Co. v/s CBDT (SC) 223 ITR 271 (viii) CIT v/s Hero Cycles (SC) 228 ITR 463 (ix) CIT v/s National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. (SC) 157 CTR 249 (x) C.I.T v/s Ramco International 332 ITR 306 (P&H) (xi) C.I.T v/s Bhaskar Mitter (Cal) 73 TAXMAN 437 (xii) C.I.T v/s Rajasthan Fasteners Pvt. Ltd. (Raj) 100 DTR 152 (xiii) Wipro Vs. CIT 282 CTR 34…

DCIT vs. M/S Kemwell Pvt. Ltd

In the result, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 210/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Renuka Prasad, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 43ASection 43A(1)

…AAR) wherein it was held that if no tax was payable in the foreign country there was no question of availing tax credit in India. e) Reliance is also placed on the following case laws. i. Tarulata Sham and other 108 ITR 345 (SC) ii. Keshavji Raoji and Company 183 ITR 1 (SC) iii. Budharaja and Company 204 ITR 412 (SC) Wherein it has been held that when the wordings in the Statute are clear and specific, it has to be followed strictly without importing or assessing any other meaning or intention. Based on the above, the rebate u/s. 90 of Rs. 68,60,892/- claimed by the assessee is disallowed and added back to income…

M/S Kemwell Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT

In the result, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 209/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Renuka Prasad, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 43ASection 43A(1)

…AAR) wherein it was held that if no tax was payable in the foreign country there was no question of availing tax credit in India. e) Reliance is also placed on the following case laws. i. Tarulata Sham and other 108 ITR 345 (SC) ii. Keshavji Raoji and Company 183 ITR 1 (SC) iii. Budharaja and Company 204 ITR 412 (SC) Wherein it has been held that when the wordings in the Statute are clear and specific, it has to be followed strictly without importing or assessing any other meaning or intention. Based on the above, the rebate u/s. 90 of Rs. 68,60,892/- claimed by the assessee is disallowed and added back to income…