Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala

245 ITR 360Supreme Court of India2000#209 most cited

What is Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala authority for?

An order refusing special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, whether speaking or non-speaking, does not attract the doctrine of merger, meaning the order under challenge is not substituted.

361

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala · doctrine of merger · special leave to appeal · refusal of SLP · speaking order · non-speaking order · section 136 · order substitution · Supreme Court · appellate order effect

Also reported as

113 Taxmann 470

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 147Section 144BSection 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 143(3)Section 136

Issues it is cited on

doctrine of mergersection 114(e)section 136section 43(3)section 193section 196sanction under section 151non-speaking ordersection 151asection 144asection 114section 151(2)

Judgments citing Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala

Mercy Chandira, Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Ncc-22(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2653/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Mr. ARV Sreenivasan, CITFor Respondent: 08.12.2025
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 14. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by t…

Vivek Kumarasamy, Kannimadaiyapudur vs. Income Tax Officer, Erode

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2512/CHNY/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2512/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Vasanthanayagan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Kamaraj Priya, Tiruvarur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tiruvarur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2484/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2484/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 V. The Ito, Kamaraj Priya, 2/94, Chinnaian Street, Ward-1, Karuvakurichi, Tiruvarur 614 018. Tiruvarur. [Pan:Dwqpp1186K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…ombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 12. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Hydrise Foods Private Limited, Uttar Pradesh, India vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 87/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…4/Mum/2015. She also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. – [2002] 256 ITR 1(Delhi). She also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kunhayammed Vs. State of Kerala – [2000] 245 ITR 360(SC) and Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Limited– [2019] 104 taxmann.com 25(SC). 19. I noted that the case law cited by the learned CIT-DR of Spacewood Furnishers (P) Ltd. (supra) relates to warrant of authorization issued under Section 132 of the Act for carrying of search by the Income-tax Department and wh…

Hydrise Foods Private Limited, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 86/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…4/Mum/2015. She also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. – [2002] 256 ITR 1(Delhi). She also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kunhayammed Vs. State of Kerala – [2000] 245 ITR 360(SC) and Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Limited– [2019] 104 taxmann.com 25(SC). 19. I noted that the case law cited by the learned CIT-DR of Spacewood Furnishers (P) Ltd. (supra) relates to warrant of authorization issued under Section 132 of the Act for carrying of search by the Income-tax Department and wh…

Subramanian Bashkaran, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corporate Ward 10(6), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2538/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: 19.11.2025
Section 133(6)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Jithender Tatia, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward-115(92), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2618/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2618/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. Jithender Tatia, The Ito, No.127, 9Th Block, Flat No.9031, Ward-115(92), 3Rd Floor, Tvh Lumbini Square, Chennai. Purasawalkam, Chennai-600 007. [Pan: Aafpj 8967 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Hitesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…ombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 12. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Vlspl 136 Vangloor Paccs, Vellore vs. ITO, Ward-1, Vellore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2609/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2609/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. Vlspl 136 Vangloor Primary The Ito, Agricultural Coop. Credit Society, Ward-1, Vlspl 136 Vangloor Pacb, Vellore. Walajapet, Vellore-632 513. [Pan: Aabav 0564 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…ologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. VLSPL 136 Vangloor PACCS :: 6 :: 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by…

Dicto Dino Raj Dennis, Kodimunai, Kalkulam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Nagercoil, Income Tax Office

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2561/CHNY/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2561/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Dicto Dino Raj Dennis, The Ito, No.4/218, Anbiyam-23, Kodimunai, Ward-(1), Kodimunai Post, Kalkulam Taluka, Nagercoil. Kanyakumari-629 251. [Pan: Brlpd 0629 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. T. Vasudevan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…ombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 12. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Sa Feeds, Salem vs. ITO, Ward-2, Namakkal

ITA 2550/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…e Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 12. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Palaniyappan Loganathan, Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Salem

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2549/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2549/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Palaniyappan Loganathan, The Ito, 5/95, South Street, Ward-1(2), Navalur Attur, Salem. Salem-636 116. [Pan: Aqjpl 5540 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.T. S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…ombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 12. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Sundaram Yesuraja Sunil, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corprate Ward 9(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2545/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2545/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. Sundaram Yesuraja Sunil, The Ito, Dr.No.1/10, Non-Corporate Ward-9(1), Kovur Vaithyanathan Street, Chennai. Chintadripet, Chennai-600 002. [Pan: Gedps 3793 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. Girish Kumar. S, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.Cit : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18.11.2025 घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.11.2025

For Appellant: Mr. Girish Kumar. SFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…ombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 12. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Sathiskumar, Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward 1, Tiruchengode

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2537/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2537/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. Sathishkumar, The Ito, 1/126, Senkuttaipalayam Ward-1, Seerampalayam Post, Tiruchengode. Samayasangali Agraharam, Tiruchengode, Namakkal-638 008. [Pan: Ggwps 7474 C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Girish Kumar. SFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…ombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 12. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Vellaisamy Natarajan, Pudhukurichi vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karaikudi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2520/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.TFor Respondent: 19.11.2025
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by t…

Kgn Fitness & Development Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-4(3), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2370/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Krishna Murthy AT, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 271(1)(c)

…y/2025 High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 14. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Kgn Fitness & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-4(3), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2369/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Krishna Murthy AT, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 271(1)(c)

…y/2025 High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 14. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Abdul Kani Kareem, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-22(1), Tambaram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1905/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: 18.11.2025
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69A

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 16. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Abdul Kani Kareem, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-22(1), Tambaram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1904/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: 18.11.2025
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69A

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 16. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…

Thurapsha Syed Ibrahim, Tirunelveli vs. ITO, Ward-4, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 1884/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1884/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. Thurapsha Syed Ibrahim, The Ito, No.6/16, Pallivasal Street, Ward-4, Vedampudur, Aiyampuram P.O., Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 805. [Pan: Abepi 2962E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…mbay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 12. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarised the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. The Tamil Nadu Co-Operative Milk Producers Federation Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2379/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri P.M.Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 (SC) has summarized the doctrine of merger as follows:- "Where an appeal or revision is provided before a superior forum against an order passed by a Court, Tribunal or any other authority and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges with the decision by th…