LIC v. Escorts Ltd.58 and Vodafone 58

1 SCC 264Reported decision1986#2490 most cited
46

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 131Section 142(2A)Section 147

Issues it is cited on

section 114(e)sanction under section 151section 90asection 114substantive assessmentsection 153a(1)(b)section 144aprotective assessmentsection 151(2)section 158bgsection 142(2a)kelvinator

Judgments citing LIC v. Escorts Ltd.58 and Vodafone 58

Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2, Delhi vs. Pt Lp Display Indonesia

ITA/145/2021HC Delhi21 Sept 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

Section 34Section 89

…mpany and its controller which will make it unnecessary to pierce the corporate veil.” 73. The position of law regarding this principle in India has been enumerated in various decisions. A Constitution Bench of this Court in LIC v. Escorts Ltd. [(1986) 1 SCC 264] , while discussing the doctrine of corporate veil, held that : (SCC pp. 335-36, para 90)” “90. … Generally and broadly speaking, we may say that the corporate veil may be lifted where a statute itself contemplates lifting the veil, or fraud or improper conduct is intended to be prevented, or a taxing statute or a beneficent statute is sough…

Rajesh Jajodia vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 45 Kolkata and Ors

ITAT/26/2020HC Calcutta27 Aug 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ

…the proposition that controlling interest is inextricably linked to ownership / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19…

M/S Singhi and Co vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax VIII

ITA/15/2020HC Calcutta27 Apr 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

…the proposition that controlling interest is inextricably linked to ownership / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19…

Tcg Life Sciences Pvt Ltd vs. Joint Comm of Income Tax Range59 Kol and Anr

ITA/26/2020HC Calcutta04 Mar 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

…the proposition that controlling interest is inextricably linked to ownership / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Kesoram Industries Ltd

ITAT/17/2020HC Calcutta13 Jan 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

…the proposition that controlling interest is inextricably linked to ownership / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19…

Shweta Chhawchharia vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-12

ITAT/15/2020HC Calcutta21 Dec 2020

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA

…the proposition that controlling interest is inextricably linked to ownership / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2, Kolkata vs. Electrocast Sales India Ltd

ITAT/11/2020HC Calcutta18 Dec 2020

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA

…the proposition that controlling interest is inextricably linked to ownership / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19…

Chandrakant S/O Tammanna Majagi vs. Karnataka State Bar Council

Appeal is allowed

WA/100141/2020HC Karnataka30 Nov 2020

Bench: M.I.ARUN,G.NARENDAR

Section 4

…- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT APPEAL NO.100141/2020 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI CHANDRAKANT S/O. TAMMANNA MAJAGI, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC. ADVOCATE AND VICE PRESIDENT OF BELAGAVI BAR ASSOCIATION, BELAGAVI, R/O. PLOT NO.1011, CTS NO.5646, SECTOR NO.VI, M.M.EXTENSION, SHRINAGAR, BELAGAVI 590017. …APPELLANT (BY SRI.MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADV.) AND: 1. KARNATAKA STATE BAR COUNCIL, OLD ELECTION COMMISSION BUILDING, BENGALURU…

M/s. Canara Securities Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/3/2020HC Telangana25 Aug 2020

Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD

…the proposition that controlling interest is inextricably linked to ownership / voting powers of the shares held in the company and personal influence is not a legal right and thus, not 15(1986) 1 SCC 264 161960 SCC Online Cal 181 17 1973 SCC Online Bom 71 18 (2012) 6 SCC 613 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 107 of 300 enforceable in law. For the same preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Versus SEBI 19…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Anil Aggarwal, New Delhi

Accordingly, they are dismissed. The cross objection of the assessee also dismissed

ITA 4668/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Samar Bhadra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 134(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 6Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)Section 9(1)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. Assessment Year 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 4665/Del/2015 2009-10 4666/Del/2015 2010-11 4667/Del/2015 2011-12 4668/Del/2015 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. Anil Aggarwal, Central Circle-19, S-71, Greater Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: ACJPA8635N (Appellant) (Respondent) CO Nos In ITA NOs. Assessment Year 416/Del/2015 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 417/Del/2015 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 418/Del/2015 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 419/Del/2015 4665/Del/201…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Anil Aggarwal, New Delhi

Accordingly, they are dismissed. The cross objection of the assessee also dismissed

ITA 4665/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Samar Bhadra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 134(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 6Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)Section 9(1)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. Assessment Year 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 4665/Del/2015 2009-10 4666/Del/2015 2010-11 4667/Del/2015 2011-12 4668/Del/2015 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. Anil Aggarwal, Central Circle-19, S-71, Greater Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: ACJPA8635N (Appellant) (Respondent) CO Nos In ITA NOs. Assessment Year 416/Del/2015 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 417/Del/2015 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 418/Del/2015 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 419/Del/2015 4665/Del/201…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Anil Aggarwal, New Delhi

Accordingly, they are dismissed. The cross objection of the assessee also dismissed

ITA 4664/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Samar Bhadra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 134(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 6Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)Section 9(1)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. Assessment Year 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 4665/Del/2015 2009-10 4666/Del/2015 2010-11 4667/Del/2015 2011-12 4668/Del/2015 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. Anil Aggarwal, Central Circle-19, S-71, Greater Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: ACJPA8635N (Appellant) (Respondent) CO Nos In ITA NOs. Assessment Year 416/Del/2015 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 417/Del/2015 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 418/Del/2015 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 419/Del/2015 4665/Del/201…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Anil Aggarwal, New Delhi

Accordingly, they are dismissed. The cross objection of the assessee also dismissed

ITA 4663/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Samar Bhadra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 134(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 6Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)Section 9(1)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. Assessment Year 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 4665/Del/2015 2009-10 4666/Del/2015 2010-11 4667/Del/2015 2011-12 4668/Del/2015 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. Anil Aggarwal, Central Circle-19, S-71, Greater Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: ACJPA8635N (Appellant) (Respondent) CO Nos In ITA NOs. Assessment Year 416/Del/2015 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 417/Del/2015 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 418/Del/2015 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 419/Del/2015 4665/Del/201…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Anil Aggarwal, New Delhi

Accordingly, they are dismissed. The cross objection of the assessee also dismissed

ITA 4662/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Samar Bhadra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 134(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 6Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)Section 9(1)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. Assessment Year 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 4665/Del/2015 2009-10 4666/Del/2015 2010-11 4667/Del/2015 2011-12 4668/Del/2015 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. Anil Aggarwal, Central Circle-19, S-71, Greater Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: ACJPA8635N (Appellant) (Respondent) CO Nos In ITA NOs. Assessment Year 416/Del/2015 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 417/Del/2015 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 418/Del/2015 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 419/Del/2015 4665/Del/201…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Anil Aggarwal, New Delhi

Accordingly, they are dismissed. The cross objection of the assessee also dismissed

ITA 4667/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Samar Bhadra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 134(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 6Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)Section 9(1)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. Assessment Year 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 4665/Del/2015 2009-10 4666/Del/2015 2010-11 4667/Del/2015 2011-12 4668/Del/2015 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. Anil Aggarwal, Central Circle-19, S-71, Greater Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: ACJPA8635N (Appellant) (Respondent) CO Nos In ITA NOs. Assessment Year 416/Del/2015 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 417/Del/2015 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 418/Del/2015 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 419/Del/2015 4665/Del/201…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Anil Aggarwal, New Delhi

Accordingly, they are dismissed. The cross objection of the assessee also dismissed

ITA 4666/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Samar Bhadra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 134(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 6Section 6(3)Section 6(3)(ii)Section 9(1)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. Assessment Year 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 4665/Del/2015 2009-10 4666/Del/2015 2010-11 4667/Del/2015 2011-12 4668/Del/2015 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. Anil Aggarwal, Central Circle-19, S-71, Greater Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: ACJPA8635N (Appellant) (Respondent) CO Nos In ITA NOs. Assessment Year 416/Del/2015 4662/Del/2015 2006-07 417/Del/2015 4663/Del/2015 2007-08 418/Del/2015 4664/Del/2015 2008-09 419/Del/2015 4665/Del/201…

Systems America (India) Ltd vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Department is dismissed

ITA 905/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 195Section 234BSection 250Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 80

…Vs Patel Lallubhai Ishvarbhai (AIR 1984 ) Gu. 145 6. Smt. Anjali Das Vs. Bidvut Sarkar AIR 1992 Cal. 147 7. Indra Prasad Saxena Vs Chaman Lai Malik AIR 1984 All 105 8. Raghunath Vs Jogeshwar Prasad Sharma AIR 1989 Delhi 383 9. LIC Vs Escorts (reported as 1986 1 SCC 264 12. The learned CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that the decisions relied by the assessee were not applicable to the facts of the assessee’s case. He sustained the action of the AO by observing at page no. 10 of the impugned order as under:- “The learned counsel has not disputed the factum of transfer of beneficia…

ACIT, Circle-7(1) vs. System America India Ltd

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Department is dismissed

ITA 1492/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Respondent: Sh. M. Baranwal, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 195Section 234BSection 250Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 80

…Vs Patel Lallubhai Ishvarbhai (AIR 1984 ) Gu. 145 6. Smt. Anjali Das Vs. Bidvut Sarkar AIR 1992 Cal. 147 7. Indra Prasad Saxena Vs Chaman Lai Malik AIR 1984 All 105 8. Raghunath Vs Jogeshwar Prasad Sharma AIR 1989 Delhi 383 9. LIC Vs Escorts (reported as 1986 1 SCC 264 12. The learned CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that the decisions relied by the assessee were not applicable to the facts of the assessee’s case. He sustained the action of the AO by observing at page no. 10 of the impugned order as under:- “The learned counsel has not disputed the factum of transfer of beneficia…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Shanghai Electric Group Co. Ltd

ITA/461/2018HC Delhi17 Apr 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 9

…the case of Arcelormittal (supra) are as under:- “33. The doctrine of piercing the corporate veil is as well settled as the Salomon [Salomon v. A. Salomon & Co. Ltd., 1897 AC 22 (HL)] principle itself. In LIC v. Escorts Ltd. [LIC v. Escorts Ltd., (1986) 1 SCC 264], this Court held: (SCC pp. 334-36, para 90): “xxx xxx xxx O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 460-461/2018 Page 52 of 79 In Palmer's Company Law (23rd Edn.), the present position in England is stated and the occasions when the corporate veil may be lifted have been enumerated and classified into fourteen cat…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central-3 vs. Hfcl Infotel Ltd

ITA/460/2018HC Delhi16 Apr 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 9

…the case of Arcelormittal (supra) are as under:- “33. The doctrine of piercing the corporate veil is as well settled as the Salomon [Salomon v. A. Salomon & Co. Ltd., 1897 AC 22 (HL)] principle itself. In LIC v. Escorts Ltd. [LIC v. Escorts Ltd., (1986) 1 SCC 264], this Court held: (SCC pp. 334-36, para 90): “xxx xxx xxx O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 460-461/2018 Page 52 of 79 In Palmer's Company Law (23rd Edn.), the present position in England is stated and the occasions when the corporate veil may be lifted have been enumerated and classified into fourteen cat…