Luke v. IRC

54 ITR 692Reported decision1996#10075 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Luke v. IRC

ADIT BALBHIM VYAYAM SHALA,SANGLI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 779/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.779/Pun/2024 अपील Adi Balbhim Vyayam Shala, Vishnughat, Gaonbhag, Sangli – 414 416, Maharashtra .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaata3971A बनाम बनाम / V/S. बनाम बनाम Cit(Exemption), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 12.07.2024 आदेश आदेश / Order आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

…n, it is now a settled rule of construction that the courts may modify the language used by the Legislature or even “do some violence” to it, so as to achieve the obvious intention of the Legislature and produce a rational construction vide Luke V. IRC (1996) 54 ITR 692. The court may also in such a case read into the statutory provision a condition which, though not expressed, is implicit as constituting the basic assumption underlying the statutory provision. 8. In our considered opinion, in the light of the above discussion, a fair and reasonable construction clause (iii) of proviso to section 80G(5) would be…

VAIJANTHI MAHAVIR OZA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(IT)-3(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 5799/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5799/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिाम/ Vaijanthi Mahavir Oza, Income Tax Officer- C/O. Chhajed & Doshi, (International Taxation)- 101, Hubtown Solaris, 3(3)(1) V. N.S Phadke Marg, Room No. 1628, Near East West Flyover, 16Th Floor Andheri (E), Air India Building Mumbai- 400069 Mumbai स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Abepo5631J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri. Piyush Chhajjed Revenue By: Miss. Deepika Arora (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 09.01.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 5799/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 23.06.2017, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-57, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2014-15, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 23.12.2016 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2014-15. I.T.A. No.5799/Mum/2017

For Appellant: Shri. Piyush ChhajjedFor Respondent: Miss. Deepika Arora (DR)
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

…literally would "defeat the obvious intention of the legislation and produce a wholly unreasonable result" we must "do some violence to the words" and so achieve that obvious intention and produce a rational construction (per Lord Leid in Luke vs. IRC [1964] 54 ITR 692/[1963] AC 557 where at page 577, he also observed: "this is not a new problem, though our standard of drafting is such that it rarely emerges.". In view the above, as there are contrary decisions on the subject, though the latest decision of the ITAT is in favour of the revenue, the amendment to the statute set at test the controversy. In the ligh…