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

Ajay Shankarlal Bankda, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 16(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2484/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2484/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ajay Shankarlal Bankda बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-16(2) B Wing 4301, Db Woods, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Gokuldham, Goregaon East, Maharshi Karve Marg Mumbai-400063. Road, New Marine Lines, Churchagate, Mumbai- 400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpb2851J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By: Shri Anil Sant (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 21.06.2023 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Addition Of Rs.88,06,950/- Made By The Ao U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant (Sr. DR)
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…of the Hon’ble High Court has to be seen if similar facts are permeating in the present appeal also and if there is difference on facts, then the judgment cannot be applied. In the judgment of 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 17, the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that if the High Court has not admitted the question of law, and has dismissed the appeal, then it is a case of dismissal in liminie. Even on merits and facts, the judgment of Udit Kalra vs ITO (supra) is distinguishable as in that case the company was…

Neeta Rajesh Lodha, Mumbai vs. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 408/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.408/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Neeta Rajesh Lodha बिधम/ Cit(Appeals)/Nfac 20/22, Shamseth Street, National Faceless Appeal, Vs. Zaveri Bazar, Mumbai- Centre (Nfac), Delhi. 400002. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abdpl8053A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 20.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao By Making An Addition Of Rs.2,61,43,231/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act As Well As Upholding The Addition Of Rs.5,22,865/- As Commission (2% Of Sales Proceeds) For Arranging Bogus Ltcg U/S 69 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. AR)
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68Section 69

…of the Hon’ble High Court has to be seen if similar facts are permeating in the present appeal also and if there is difference on facts, then the judgment cannot be applied. In the judgment of 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 17, the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that if the High Court has not admitted the question of law, and has dismissed the appeal, then it is a case of dismissal in liminie. Even on merits and facts, the judgment of Udit Kalra vs ITO (supra) is distinguishable as in that case the company was…

Mr Bhavesh Kantilal Kubadia, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-21(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1490/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1490/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Mr. Bhavesh Kantilal बिधम/ Ito, Ward-21(1)(2) Kubadia Room No. 104, 1St Floor, Vs. 7, 2Nd Floor, Neminath Piramal Chamber, Building, S. K. Bole Road, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai- (Dadar (W), Mumbai- 400012. 400028. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agrpk2377D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 24.04.2023 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao Making An Addition Of Rs.77,02,597 U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act As Well As Upholding The Addition Of Rs.2,31,038/- As Commission (3% Of Ltcg) For Arranging Bogus Ltcg U/S 69 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. AR)
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68Section 69

…of the Hon’ble High Court has to be seen if similar facts are permeating in the present appeal also and if there is difference on facts, then the judgment cannot be applied. In the judgment of 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 17, the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that if the High Court has not admitted the question of law, and has dismissed the appeal, then it is a case of dismissal in liminie. Even on merits and facts, the judgment of Udit Kalra vs ITO (supra) is distinguishable as in that case the company was…

Sheetal Rupesh Salva, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.95/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ Ito Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev In Apartments, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpk2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 09.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao By Making An Addition Of Rs.3,20,97,772/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. AR)
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68

…een if similar facts are permeating in the present appeal also and if there is difference on facts, then the judgment cannot be applied. In the judgment of Hon’ble Apex 36 A.Y. 2013-14 Sheetal Rupesh Savla Court in Kunhayyammed vs State of Kerala reported in 245 ITR 360 and also in CIT vs. Rashtradoot (HUF) reported in 412 ITR 17, the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that if the High Court has not admitted the question of law, and has dismissed the appeal, then it is a case of dismissal in liminie. Even on merits and facts, the judgment of Udit Kalra vs ITO (supra) is distinguishable as in that case the company was…

Sheetal Rupesh Salva, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 94/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.94/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ Ito Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev In Apartments, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpk2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 07.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao By Making An Addition Of Rs.73,11,760/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. AR)
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68

…of the Hon’ble High Court has to be seen if similar facts are permeating in the present appeal also and if there is difference on facts, then the judgment cannot be applied. In the judgment of 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 17, the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that if the High Court has not admitted the question of law, and has dismissed the appeal, then it is a case of dismissal in liminie. Even on merits and facts, the judgment of Udit Kalra vs ITO (supra) is distinguishable as in that case the company was…

ACIT, Circle-3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. Sheraton Overseas Management Corporation, Noida

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2392/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Amit AroraFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…has been challenged and is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment fill date. Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others vs State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeals, are dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in Sheraton international Inc. (supra). 7. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeals sh…

Krishak Bharti Cooperative Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 478/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharata.Y. 2017-18 & A.Y. 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…has been challenged and is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment till date. Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax- VI,…

Krishak Bharati Cooperative Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle 30, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 477/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharata.Y. 2017-18 & A.Y. 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…has been challenged and is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment till date. Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax- VI,…

DCIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 1043/DEL/2023[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharata.Y. 2017-18 & A.Y. 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…has been challenged and is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment till date. Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax- VI,…

DCIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd., Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 1042/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharata.Y. 2017-18 & A.Y. 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…has been challenged and is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment till date. Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax- VI,…

Komal Agarwal, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-7(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 645/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 645/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Komal Agarwal बिधम / Dcit, Central Circle 7(3) 203, Ugam, N.S Road No.9, Room No 655, 6Th Floor, Vs. Jvpd Scheme, Juhu, Ville Ayakar Bhavan, M.K. Parle (W), Mumbai-400097 Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 स्थधयी लेखध सं/.जीआइआर सं/.Pan/Gir No. : Ahwpr9295B (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Harion TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 68

…of the Hon’ble High Court has to be seen if similar facts are permeating in the present appeal also and if there is difference on facts, then the judgment cannot be applied. In the judgment of 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 17, the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that if the High Court has not admitted the question of law, and has dismissed the appeal, then it is a case of dismissal in liminie. Even on merits and facts, the judgment of Udit Kalra vs ITO (supra) is distinguishable as in that case the company was…

M/S. Vedanga Vinimoy Pvt.Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 1165/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 14A

…on before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment till date. Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and 9 AY: 2017-18 M/s. Vedanga Vinimoy Pvt. Ltd. Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, (…

ACIT Circle Intl Taxation 3(1)(1), New Delhi vs. Westin Hotel Management L.P., Noida

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2391/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra[Assessment Year: 2021-22]

Section 143(3)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)

…has been challenged and is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment till date. Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeals are dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in Sheraton International Inc. (supra). 7. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeals sha…

Baba Hira Singh Bhattal Institute of Engineering & Technology, Lehragaga vs. DCIT, (E), C-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 870/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aman Parti, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sharma, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 11

…/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2015-16 14 which is under appeal at the hands of the assessee before this Tribunal. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “Kunhayammed & others Vs State of Kerala & another” [2000] 245 ITR 360 (S.C). Reliance has also been placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of “CIT Vs Tejaji Farasram Kharawa” [1953] 23 ITR 412 (Bom). Reliance has further been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of “CIT Vs Amrit Lal Bhogilal & Co”, [1958] 34 ITR 130 (S.C.) Reliance has also been placed on the dec…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (1), Panaji vs. M/S V. M. Salgaocar & Brothers (P) Ltd., Vasco

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 211/PAN/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

…॥ आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पणजी न्यायपीठ, पणजी में ॥ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA Nos. 209 to 211/PAN/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 to 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s. M/s. V. M. Salgaonkar & Brother Pvt. Ltd., Salgaonkar House, F.L. Gomes Road, Vasco Da Gama, Goa. PAN: AAACV 5950 B . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : Mr Ketan Ve…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (1), Panaji vs. M/S V. M. Salgaocar & Brothers (P) Ltd., Vasco

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 210/PAN/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

…॥ आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पणजी न्यायपीठ, पणजी में ॥ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA Nos. 209 to 211/PAN/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 to 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s. M/s. V. M. Salgaonkar & Brother Pvt. Ltd., Salgaonkar House, F.L. Gomes Road, Vasco Da Gama, Goa. PAN: AAACV 5950 B . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : Mr Ketan Ve…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (1), Panaji vs. M/S V. M. Salgaocar & Brothers (P) Ltd., Vasco

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 209/PAN/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

…॥ आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पणजी न्यायपीठ, पणजी में ॥ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA Nos. 209 to 211/PAN/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 to 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/s. M/s. V. M. Salgaonkar & Brother Pvt. Ltd., Salgaonkar House, F.L. Gomes Road, Vasco Da Gama, Goa. PAN: AAACV 5950 B . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee by : Mr Ketan Ve…

DCIT, Circle 3(1)(2) Intl. Taxation, New Delhi vs. Sheraton Overseas Management Corporation, Noida

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 1626/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 With Assessment Year: 2020-21 Dcit, Vs. Sheraton Overseas Circle -3(1)(2), Management Corporation, International Taxation, C/O- M/S. Nangia & Co. New Delhi Llp, A-109, Sector-136, Noida Pan :Aalcs8306H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vii)

…has been challenged and is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment till date. Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeals are dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in Sheraton International Inc. (supra). 7. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeals sha…

DCIT, Circle-3(1)(2) Int. Taxation, New Delhi vs. Sheraton Overseas Mangaement Corporation, Noida

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 1625/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 With Assessment Year: 2020-21 Dcit, Vs. Sheraton Overseas Circle -3(1)(2), Management Corporation, International Taxation, C/O- M/S. Nangia & Co. New Delhi Llp, A-109, Sector-136, Noida Pan :Aalcs8306H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vii)

…has been challenged and is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment till date. Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeals are dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in Sheraton International Inc. (supra). 7. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeals sha…

DCIT, Circle 3(1)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi vs. Sheraton Overseas Management Corporation, Noida

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 1624/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Vs. Sheraton Overseas Circle -3(1)(2), Management Corporation, International Taxation, C/O- M/S. Nangia & Co. New Delhi Llp, A-109, Sector-136, Noida Pan :Aalcs8306H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 9(1)(vii)

…has been challenged and is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgment till date. Consequently, in view of the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeals are dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in Sheraton International Inc. (supra). 7. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeals sha…