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 366,339 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

Kuppusamy Muthuvel, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Chennai

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

ITA 944/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.944/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Kuppusamy Muthuvel, The Income Tax Officer, No.23/1 Arasu Elango Street, Ward-2(4), Eripalayajm Po, Udumalpet Tk, Tirupur. Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu-642126 [Pan: Axepm0652R] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By Ms. R.Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2025

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148A

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 11. 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:- Kuppusamy Muthuvel :: 6 :: "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 mer…

Kumaresan Bhagavathiperumal Pillai, Kanyakumari vs. The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Tuticorin

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

ITA 1357/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1357/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. Kumaresan Bhagavathiperumal Pillai, The Ito, 12-5 G/4, Kumaragam Garden, International Taxation Ward, Channel Street, Vadakkoor, Thovalai, Tuticorin. Kanyakumari 629 302. [Pan: Ahepb 2348 F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Chennai-16, (Hereinafter In Short ‘The Ld.Cit(A)’), Dated 31.07.2024 For The Assessment Year (Hereinafter In Short ‘Ay’) 2018-19. 2. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of ‘224’ Days In Filing The Appeal. Considering The Period Of Delay & Reasons Pleaded, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Adjudication. Kumaresan Bhagavathiperumal Pillai :: 2 :: 3. At The Outset, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Raised An Additional Ground Relating To Jurisdiction Of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (‘Jao’) In The Light Of The Cbdt Notification Dated 29.03.2022. The Ld.Dr, Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit, Objected Admission Of Additional Ground Raised By The Assessee.

For Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148A

…Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technologies Ltd Vs ACIT (2024) 464 ITR 430 (Bom) is still pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 11. 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…

M/S. Bata India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DDIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1073/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115Section 115PSection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'ए' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री संजय शमाा, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 1073/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 M/s. Bata India Ltd. DDIT, CPC, Bengaluru Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCB1043Q Appearances: Assessee represented by : Siddharth Jhajharia, FCA. Department represented by : Manas Mondal, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 23-July-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 25-July-202…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Pune vs. Giriraj Enterprises, Pune

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

ITA 553/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271ASection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2021-22 M/s. Giriraj Enterprises DCIT, Central Circle 1 Modi Baug, Building A, 1(1), Pune Vs. Shivaji Nagar, Ganesh Khind Road, Pune – 411016 PAN: AACFG1563G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment year : 2021-22 ACIT, Central Circle M/s. Giriraj Enterprises 1(1), Pune 1 Modi Baug, Building A, Vs. Shivaji Nagar, Ganesh Khind Road, Pune – 411016 PAN: AACFG1563G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department by : Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-…

M/S Giriraj Enterprises, Pune vs. DCIT, CC.1(1), Pune

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

ITA 427/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271ASection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2021-22 M/s. Giriraj Enterprises DCIT, Central Circle 1 Modi Baug, Building A, 1(1), Pune Vs. Shivaji Nagar, Ganesh Khind Road, Pune – 411016 PAN: AACFG1563G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment year : 2021-22 ACIT, Central Circle M/s. Giriraj Enterprises 1(1), Pune 1 Modi Baug, Building A, Vs. Shivaji Nagar, Ganesh Khind Road, Pune – 411016 PAN: AACFG1563G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department by : Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-…

Govind Corporation, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 8(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands

ITA 3229/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…mulated by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the said case and there is only dismissal of appeal in limine and the Hon'ble High Court found that the issue involved is a question of fact as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in Kunhayyammed vs State of Kerala reported in 245 ITR 360 and also in CIT vs. Rashtradoot (HUF) reported in 412 ITR. Even on merits and facts, the said judgment in the case of Udit Kalra vs ITO (supra) is distinguishable as in that case the scrips of the company were delisted on stock exchange, whereas, in the instant case, the interim order of SEBI in the cases of M/s Esteem Bio and M/s Turbotech have…

Universal Biomass Energy Private Limited, Guruharsahai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1), Ferozepur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 267/ASR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 80I

…nt order passed u/s 143(3) preferred before the first appellate authority was legal and valid. I.T.A. No. 267/Asr/2024 13 Assessment Year: 2018-19 14.3 We further refer to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Kunhayammedv. State of Kerala 113 Taxmann 470 (SC) 245 ITR 360 dated 19.07.2000, has aptly summed up the doctrine of merger as follows: “Where an appeal or revision is provided against an order passed by a court, tribunal or any other authority before superior forum and such superior forum modifies, reverses or affirms the decision put in issue before it, the decision by the subordinate forum merges in the d…

ACIT-8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Retail Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4251/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate, Shri NimeshFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Assistant Commissioner of Reliance Retail Ltd., Income Tax – 8(1)(1), 3rd Floor, Court House, Mumbai Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Vs. Dhobi Talao, Mumbai – 400 002 (PAN : AABCR1718E) (Appellant) (Respondent) CO No.194/Mum/2024 (Arising out of ITA 4251/Mum/2024) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Reliance Retail Ltd., Assistant Commissioner of 3rd Floor, Court House, Income Tax – 8(1)(1), Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Mumbai Dhobi Talao, Vs. Mumbai – 400 002 (PAN :…

Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Range-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 7865/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)

…In either case it does not attract the doctrine of merger. In other words, an order refusing special leave to appeal does not stand substituted in place of the rder under challenge. Reliance in this regard is placed on Kunhayammed vs. State of Kerala, [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) [@para 44] and Khoday Distilleries Ltd. vs. Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd, [2019] 262 Taxman 279 (SC) [@para 27]. Page 10 of 23 ITA Nos. 7626 to 7629 and 865/DEL/2018 [Housing Urban Dev. Corpn] [A.Ys 2005-06 to 2009-10] 3. Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income- tax v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd, [2019] 41…

Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd (Hudco), New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Range-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 7629/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)

…In either case it does not attract the doctrine of merger. In other words, an order refusing special leave to appeal does not stand substituted in place of the rder under challenge. Reliance in this regard is placed on Kunhayammed vs. State of Kerala, [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) [@para 44] and Khoday Distilleries Ltd. vs. Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd, [2019] 262 Taxman 279 (SC) [@para 27]. Page 10 of 23 ITA Nos. 7626 to 7629 and 865/DEL/2018 [Housing Urban Dev. Corpn] [A.Ys 2005-06 to 2009-10] 3. Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income- tax v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd, [2019] 41…

Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd (Hudco), New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 7628/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)

…In either case it does not attract the doctrine of merger. In other words, an order refusing special leave to appeal does not stand substituted in place of the rder under challenge. Reliance in this regard is placed on Kunhayammed vs. State of Kerala, [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) [@para 44] and Khoday Distilleries Ltd. vs. Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd, [2019] 262 Taxman 279 (SC) [@para 27]. Page 10 of 23 ITA Nos. 7626 to 7629 and 865/DEL/2018 [Housing Urban Dev. Corpn] [A.Ys 2005-06 to 2009-10] 3. Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income- tax v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd, [2019] 41…

Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd (Hudco), New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Range-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 7626/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gagan Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)

…In either case it does not attract the doctrine of merger. In other words, an order refusing special leave to appeal does not stand substituted in place of the rder under challenge. Reliance in this regard is placed on Kunhayammed vs. State of Kerala, [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) [@para 44] and Khoday Distilleries Ltd. vs. Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd, [2019] 262 Taxman 279 (SC) [@para 27]. Page 10 of 23 ITA Nos. 7626 to 7629 and 865/DEL/2018 [Housing Urban Dev. Corpn] [A.Ys 2005-06 to 2009-10] 3. Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income- tax v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd, [2019] 41…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Chennai

Appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2901/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2900 & 2901/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2013-14)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'ए' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री जगदीश, लेख सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2900 & 2901/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2013-14) The Assistant Commissioner of Vs M/s.Ramco Income Tax Corporate Circle, Madurai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे / Appellant by प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Respondent by सुनवाईकी तारीख/Date of hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / Date of Pronouncement Industries 98A, Auras Corporation Cent…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Chennai

Appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2900/CHNY/2024[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.V.Justin, CITFor Respondent: Mr. S.Muralidhar, FCA &
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र ,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश , लेखा सद" के सम% BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2900 & 2901/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2013-14) Vs M/s.Ramco The Assistant Commissioner of Industries Income Tax Limited, Corporate Circle, 98A, Auras Corporation Centre, Madurai. Dr.Radhakrishnan Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. PAN : AAACR-5284-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr.V.Justin, CIT…

Infosoft Global P Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 501/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'सी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री जॉजज माथान, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 501/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Infosoft Global (P) Ltd. DCIT, Cir.-1(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCI3240G Appearances: Assessee represented by : Sunil Surana, AR. Department represented by : Ruchika Sharma, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : February 25th, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : March 21st,…

Vanshika Motors (P) Ltd., Meerut vs. ACIT, Circle- 2, Meerut

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6214/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 274

…titution of India. Consequently, it has no binding precedent value, in contradiction with a reasoned order of theHon’ble Supreme Court or an order passed in appeal. Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Kunhayammed 245 ITR 360 and Khoday Distilleries Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 25 (SC)].The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of State of Orissa and Another v. Dhirendra Sundar Das And Others – [(2019) 6 SCC 270 (SC)] has clarified this position with the following observations at Para 9.27: “9.27 It is a well settled principle of law emerging from a catena of decisions of this…

Kuldeep Singh Shekhawat, Kota vs. ITO W-2(1), Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 701/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Gagan Goyalkuldeep Singh Shekhawat, 11, Samridhi Traders, Police Line, Gopal Vihar, Baran Road-324001 Pan No. Araps0973M ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Kota …... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar, JCIT, Ld. DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 54Section 54BSection 54F

…g a specific position taken by the Revenue. Also, the Supreme Court has to be understood to have differed in law with the Kerala High Court. The following verdict of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 113 Taxman 470/245 ITR 360 supports the aforesaid proposition: "Once a special leave petition has been granted, the doors for the exercise of appellate jurisdiction of this Court have been let open. The order impugned before the Supreme Court becomes an order appealed against. Any order passed thereafter would be an appellate order and would attract the applicability of do…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Khemka Stuart Leisure Ltd., New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6215/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 274

…titution of India. Consequently, it has no binding precedent value, in contradiction with a reasoned order of theHon’ble Supreme Court or an order passed in appeal. Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Kunhayammed 245 ITR 360 and Khoday Distilleries Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 25 (SC)].The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of State of Orissa and Another v. Dhirendra Sundar Das And Others – [(2019) 6 SCC 270 (SC)] has clarified this position with the following observations at Para 9.27: “9.27 It is a well settled principle of law emerging from a catena of decisions of this…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Madurai

Appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2884/CHNY/2024[2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2883 & 2884/Chny/2024. (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, 47, Psk Nagar, Corporate Circle, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai [Pan Aaacr 5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S. Muralidhar & Shri J. Prabhakar, F.C.As. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. S. Muralidhar and Shri JFor Respondent: Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपील सं./ ITA Nos.2883 & 2884/Chny/2024. (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) The Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, 47, PSK Nagar, Corporate Circle, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai [PAN AAACR 5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Rajapalayam

Appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2883/CHNY/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2883 & 2884/Chny/2024. (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, 47, Psk Nagar, Corporate Circle, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai [Pan Aaacr 5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S. Muralidhar & Shri J. Prabhakar, F.C.As. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. S. Muralidhar and Shri JFor Respondent: Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपील सं./ ITA Nos.2883 & 2884/Chny/2024. (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) The Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, 47, PSK Nagar, Corporate Circle, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai [PAN AAACR 5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri…