Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

350 ITR 24High Court2013#5044 most cited

What is Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax authority for?

The rule of consistency should not be applied to perpetuate an anomaly or a patently wrong view taken in the past.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax · 350 ITR 24 · rule of consistency · anomaly · patently wrong view · income-tax proceedings · Delhi High Court · Supreme Court · Radhasoami Satsang

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 22Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 255(4)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 295carry forward of lossessection 194irule of consistencyprincipal officerbusiness expediencysection 260section 260asection 40a(3)section 200assessee in defaultsection 201(1)

Judgments citing Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Supreme Transport Company, Indore vs. ITO TDS-II, Indore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 917/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

…plicable in income-tax proceedings. 5. As regards 'Rule of consistency' is concerned, she placed reliance on the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Krishak Bharati Co- operative Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2012] 23 taxmann.com 265/210 Taxman 123/[2013] 350 ITR 24 (Delhi) wherein Hon'ble Delhi HC considered the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT (1992] 60 Taxman 248/193 ITR 321 (SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand v. CIT [2008] 171 Taxman 147/306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii…

Supreme Transport Company, Indore vs. ITO TDS-II, Indore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 914/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

…plicable in income-tax proceedings. 5. As regards 'Rule of consistency' is concerned, she placed reliance on the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Krishak Bharati Co- operative Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2012] 23 taxmann.com 265/210 Taxman 123/[2013] 350 ITR 24 (Delhi) wherein Hon'ble Delhi HC considered the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT (1992] 60 Taxman 248/193 ITR 321 (SC) and has held that the rule of consistency should not create anomaly. She also relied on the following decisions:- (i) Rohitasava Chand v. CIT [2008] 171 Taxman 147/306 ITR 242 (Delhi) (ii…

Future First Info Services Private Ltd., Delhi vs. AO Circle-7(1), Delhi

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

ITA 672/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 92D

…ission of the Ld. AR that there were no segmental data for different segments. 7.4 The Ld. CIT-DR, in support of above contentions/arguments/ submission, placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Krishak Bharti Corp. Ltd. 350 ITR 24. Further, the Ld. CIT-DR 18 Future First Info Services Pvt. Ltd. placed reliance on decisions of Tribunal in the cases of Bechtel India (P) Ltd. 85 taxmann.com 121 (Del.), Apache Footwear India (P) Ltd. 148 taxmann.com 371 (Hyd.), Jubliant Pharmova Ltd. ITA No. 526/Del/2022 (Del.), Ameriprise India (P) Ltd. 62 taxmann.com 237 (Del.) and Techbook…

Gowtham Residential Junior College, Vijayawada vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Vijayawada

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 26/VIZ/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.25 & 26/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2013-14) Gowtham Residential Junior College V. Asst. Cit-Central Circle Vijayawada 1-87, Gudavalli Village Gudavalli, Vijayawada – 521104 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaefg4399L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 255(4)

…) (P) Ltd vs. CIT (S.C) 155 ITR 120. Thus,, a patently wrong view taken in the past cannot be allowed to perpetuate on the basis of principle of consistency as held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd vs. DCIT (Del.) 350 ITR 24. The learned DR has thus, submitted that when the business of the assessee has come to a close, the property which at one time was commercial asset cease to be so and therefore, the income from letting out of the property would not be business income. He has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Me…

Gowtham Residential Junior College, Vijayawada vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Vijayawada

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 25/VIZ/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.25 & 26/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2013-14) Gowtham Residential Junior College V. Asst. Cit-Central Circle Vijayawada 1-87, Gudavalli Village Gudavalli, Vijayawada – 521104 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaefg4399L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 255(4)

…) (P) Ltd vs. CIT (S.C) 155 ITR 120. Thus,, a patently wrong view taken in the past cannot be allowed to perpetuate on the basis of principle of consistency as held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd vs. DCIT (Del.) 350 ITR 24. The learned DR has thus, submitted that when the business of the assessee has come to a close, the property which at one time was commercial asset cease to be so and therefore, the income from letting out of the property would not be business income. He has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Me…

ACIT, Delhi vs. M/S. the Indian News Paper Society, New Delhi

ITA 116/DEL/2017[2012-13 (F.Y. 2011-12)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2021

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Ranjan Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Garg, Sr. DR
Section 194Section 201Section 201(1)

…atified by the High Court. Page 12 of 21 ITA No.116/Del/2017 and C.O. No.- 86/Del/2017 M/s The Indian News Paper Society. The abovementioned view has been approved by the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in KRISHAK BHARATI Co-operative Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2013] 350 ITR 24 (Delhi) decided ON 12.07.2012 to which my attention was drawn by the learned counsel vide letter dated 23.07.2012 enclosing the copy of the same. Thus in conformity with the consistent stand of the judiciary including the latest pronouncement of the jurisdictional High Court, in my view, undoubtedly premium in relation to leased land is a payment…

Manpasand Beverages Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Pr. CIT-2, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1209/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Us Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Processing Fruit Juices. The Assessment In This Case, Under Section 143(3), Was Completed On 28Th March 2016. Subsequently, However, The Assessment Records Came Up For Perusal By The Learned Principal

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

…l along allowed in the earlier years, and, for this reason also, denial of deduction at this stage was not warranted. On this plea, learned PCIT referred to Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s observations in the case of Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd Vs DCIT [(2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del)], inter alia, to the effect that “Similarly, erroneous or mistaken views cannot fetter the authorities into repeating them, by application of a rule such as estoppel, for the reason that being an equitable principle, it has to yield to the mandate of law. A deeper reflection would show that blind adherence to the rule of consistency would le…

Manpasand Beverages Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Pr. CIT-2, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1208/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Us Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Processing Fruit Juices. The Assessment In This Case, Under Section 143(3), Was Completed On 28Th October, 2015. Subsequently, However, The Assessment Records Came Up For Perusal By The Learned Principal

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

…l along allowed in the earlier years, and, for this reason also, denial of deduction at this stage was not warranted. On this plea, learned PCIT referred to Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s observations in the case of Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd Vs DCIT [(2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del)], inter alia, to the effect that “Similarly, erroneous or mistaken views cannot fetter the authorities into repeating them, by application of a rule such as estoppel, for the reason that being an equitable principle, it has to yield to the mandate of law. A deeper reflection would show that blind adherence to the rule of consistency would le…

Mitsubishi Corporation, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

ITA 193/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.K. Dhall, CIT DR (International Taxation)

…the basis of principle of consistency and relied upon the decision cited as Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. 282 ITR 273 (SC), M/s. N.R. Paper & Board Ltd. 234 ITR 733 (Guj.), M/s. Onward Technologies Ltd. 147 ITD 534 (Mum.) and M/s. Krishak Bharati Cooperative – 350 ITR 24 (Delhi) and contended to decide the controversy as per law applicable and not on the basis of principle of equity adopted in the past. 11. To repel the arguments addressed by the ld. AR for the assessee, the ld. DR for Revenue supported the order passed by the 12 ITA No.4659/Del./2011 ITA No.5769/Del./2010 ITA No.152/Del./2012 ITA No.193/Del./2…

Mitsubishi Corporation, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

ITA 152/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.K. Dhall, CIT DR (International Taxation)

…the basis of principle of consistency and relied upon the decision cited as Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. 282 ITR 273 (SC), M/s. N.R. Paper & Board Ltd. 234 ITR 733 (Guj.), M/s. Onward Technologies Ltd. 147 ITD 534 (Mum.) and M/s. Krishak Bharati Cooperative – 350 ITR 24 (Delhi) and contended to decide the controversy as per law applicable and not on the basis of principle of equity adopted in the past. 11. To repel the arguments addressed by the ld. AR for the assessee, the ld. DR for Revenue supported the order passed by the 12 ITA No.4659/Del./2011 ITA No.5769/Del./2010 ITA No.152/Del./2012 ITA No.193/Del./2…

Mitsubishi Corporation, New Delhi vs. DDIT, New Delhi

ITA 4659/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.K. Dhall, CIT DR (International Taxation)

…the basis of principle of consistency and relied upon the decision cited as Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. 282 ITR 273 (SC), M/s. N.R. Paper & Board Ltd. 234 ITR 733 (Guj.), M/s. Onward Technologies Ltd. 147 ITD 534 (Mum.) and M/s. Krishak Bharati Cooperative – 350 ITR 24 (Delhi) and contended to decide the controversy as per law applicable and not on the basis of principle of equity adopted in the past. 11. To repel the arguments addressed by the ld. AR for the assessee, the ld. DR for Revenue supported the order passed by the 12 ITA No.4659/Del./2011 ITA No.5769/Del./2010 ITA No.152/Del./2012 ITA No.193/Del./2…

ACIT(TDS) Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S Earnest Towers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 707/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

Section 194Section 194ASection 194ISection 201(1)

…er/Assessing Officer that the assessee was liable to deduct TDS on payment of lease premium to MMRDA. At this point, we place reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. vs DCIT (2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del) wherein their lordships held that for premium on acquisition of lease hold rights in the land, lease for 90 years with substantial interest in the land, then lease premium constituted capital expenditure. 16. In view of discussions made hereinabove, we are not in agreement with the findings of the Assessing Officer and we decline to hold tha…

ACIT(TDS) Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Earnest Towers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 243/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble]

Section 194Section 194ASection 194ISection 250

…er/Assessing Officer that the assessee was liable to deduct TDS on payment of lease premium to MMRDA. At this point, we place reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. vs DCIT (2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del) wherein their lordships held that for premium on acquisition of lease hold rights in the land, lease for 90 years with substantial interest in the land, then lease premium constituted capital expenditure. 16. In view of discussions made hereinabove, we are not in agreement with the findings of the Assessing Officer and we decline to hold tha…

ACIT(TDS) Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Earnest Towers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 242/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Jan 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble]

Section 194Section 194ASection 194ISection 250

…er/Assessing Officer that the assessee was liable to deduct TDS on payment of lease premium to MMRDA. At this point, we place reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. vs DCIT (2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del) wherein their lordships held that for premium on acquisition of lease hold rights in the land, lease for 90 years with substantial interest in the land, then lease premium constituted capital expenditure. 16. In view of discussions made hereinabove, we are not in agreement with the findings of the Assessing Officer and we decline to hold tha…

Commissioner of Income Tax-TDS vs. The Indian News Paper Society

ITA/918/2015HC Delhi10 Dec 2015
Section 194ISection 260A

…68 (SC) and the decision of the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gemini Arts P. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 201. He also referred to the recent decision of this Court in Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del). 5. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, learned counsel appearing for the Assessee referred to the specific factual findings of the CIT (A) at its discussion of the clauses of the lease agreement which have been set out in extenso by the ITAT in the impugned order. 6. At the outset, it requires to be noticed that under Section 194I of the Act the…

Honey Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

ITA - 163 / 2002HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…n to sustain over the years. Clearly, the said principle will have no application where the position canvassed militates against an express provision of law. 21. This Court in Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax: (2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del) had observed as under:- 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 30 of 39 “20. This court notices that there cannot be a wide application of the rule of consistency. In Radhasaomi itself, the Supreme Court acknowledged that there is no res judicata, as regards assessment orders, and assessments for on…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Honey Enterprises

ITA - 537 / 2004HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…n to sustain over the years. Clearly, the said principle will have no application where the position canvassed militates against an express provision of law. 21. This Court in Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax: (2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del) had observed as under:- 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 30 of 39 “20. This court notices that there cannot be a wide application of the rule of consistency. In Radhasaomi itself, the Supreme Court acknowledged that there is no res judicata, as regards assessment orders, and assessments for on…

Commr. of Income Tax vs. Honey Enterprises

ITA - 260 / 2002HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…n to sustain over the years. Clearly, the said principle will have no application where the position canvassed militates against an express provision of law. 21. This Court in Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax: (2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del) had observed as under:- 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 30 of 39 “20. This court notices that there cannot be a wide application of the rule of consistency. In Radhasaomi itself, the Supreme Court acknowledged that there is no res judicata, as regards assessment orders, and assessments for on…

Honey Enterprises

ITA/537/2004HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…n to sustain over the years. Clearly, the said principle will have no application where the position canvassed militates against an express provision of law. 21. This Court in Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax: (2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del) had observed as under:- 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 30 of 39 “20. This court notices that there cannot be a wide application of the rule of consistency. In Radhasaomi itself, the Supreme Court acknowledged that there is no res judicata, as regards assessment orders, and assessments for on…

Honey Enterprises

ITA/377/2004HC Delhi08 Dec 2015
For Appellant: Ms Shashi M. Kapila with Mr Pravesh SharmaFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Senior Standing Counsel
Section 260ASection 40A(3)

…n to sustain over the years. Clearly, the said principle will have no application where the position canvassed militates against an express provision of law. 21. This Court in Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax: (2013) 350 ITR 24 (Del) had observed as under:- 2015:DHC:10015-DB ITA 163/2002 & Connected Matters Page 30 of 39 “20. This court notices that there cannot be a wide application of the rule of consistency. In Radhasaomi itself, the Supreme Court acknowledged that there is no res judicata, as regards assessment orders, and assessments for on…

Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (350 ITR 24) — Cited in 23 Judgments | BharatTax