Madhav Rao Jivaji Rao Scindia v. Union of India

1 SCC 85Reported decision1971#9488 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 13(4)Section 250 Section 253 Section 6(3)Section 90

Issues it is cited on

book profits section 115j dispute resolution panel section 144c capital expenditure section 115jb income-tax officer section 115 section 10 section 11 previous year section 25

Judgments citing Madhav Rao Jivaji Rao Scindia v. Union of India

ESSAR COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,MAURITIUS vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1 (2)(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 340/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Venkatraman, ASG

Section 250Section 253Section 6(3)

…SEBI and did not refer or deal with direct or indirect transfer of shares constituting business investment. 8. At this juncture, reliance is placed on the decision of the 11 - Judge Bench in the case of Madhav Rao Jivaji Rao Scindia v. Union of India, (1971) 1 SCC 85 "229. In State of Orissa v. Sudhansu Sekhar Misra [AIR 1968 SC 647: (1968) 2 SCR 154 : (1968) 2 SCJ 263 J dealing with the question as to the importance to be attached to the observations found in the judgments of this Court, this is what this Court observed: "A decision is only an authority for what it actually decides. What is of the essence in a…

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 152/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT

Section 115JSection 250Section 32(1)(ii)Section 80Section 80I

…spect of the income earned by the assessee from housing project. Reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements : (i) Central Bank of India vs. State of Kerala (2009) 21 VST 505 (SC), (ii) Madhav Rao Jivaji Rao Scindia vs. Union of India (1971) 1 SCC 85 15. Sub-s. (5) which says that save as otherwise provided in this section. Similar provision was incorporated in sub-s. (4) of s. 115JA which is the predecessor of s. 115JB. But absent in s. 115J which preceded s. 115JA. This peculiar provision raised a controversy as to the legal implication of insertion of sub-s. (5) and sub-s. (4) in s. 115JB an…

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/DY/ASSTT/CIT/ITO, NATIONA FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE,, DILHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1259/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalwns Global Services Pvt. Ltd., Pl 10, Gate No.4, Godrej & Boyce Complex, Pirojshanagar, Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400079. Pan: Aaacw2598L ...... Appellant Vs.. Addl./Jt/Dy./Acit/Ito/Nfac, Room No. 455, Circle-14(3)(1), Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant/Assessee By : Sh. Porus Kaka, Sr. Adv. & Sh. Manish Kant Respondent/Revenue By : Sh. Jasdeep Singh, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Porus Kaka, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Jasdeep Singh, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92B

…erred in Section 14A (1), can be interpreted to mean 'direct and proximate, as the same has not been defined in the Act. In this regard, reliance is placed on the following judgments: HH Maharajadhiraja Madhav Rao Jivaji Rao Scindia Bahadur of Gwalior [1971] (1 SCC 85) CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (326 ITR 1) (Supreme Court) The words 'expenditure incurred by the assessee' referred in Section 14A(1) of the Act imply that the act of spending must be in relation to exempt income and the objective of the expenditure would be relevant in order to conclude on its deductibility. In nutshell, the expend…

M/S. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT (IT)1(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 803/MUM/2009[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. Acit – Range-1(3) Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Adit (It)– 2(3) V. Standard Chartered Bank Room No. 120, 1St Floor Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Assessee Represented By : Shri Fenil Bhatt Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash Department Represented By :

Section 115JSection 14ASection 90Section 90(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Standard Chartered Bank v. ACIT – Range-1(3) Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 PAN: AABCS4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) ADIT (IT)– 2(3) v. Standard Chartered Bank Room No. 120, 1st Floor Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 PAN: AABCS4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri P.J. Pard…

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3041/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2954/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Vs M/S Punjab National Bank, Circle-20(1), Ho: Finance Division, 5, Sansad New Delhi Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp0165G

For Appellant: Sh. S. Krishnan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT DR

Section 142(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 2954/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 DCIT, Vs M/s Punjab National Bank, Circle-20(1), HO: Finance Division, 5, Sansad New Delhi Marg, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACP0165G ITA No. 3041/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 M/s Punjab National Bank, Vs Addl. CIT, HO: Finance Division, 5, Sansad Circle-20(1), Marg, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACP0165G Assessee by : Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv. Revenue by : Smt. S…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2954/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2020AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. S. Krishnan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT DR

Section 142(1)

RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1763/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-2”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1583/Del/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) ITA No. 1763/Del/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Religare Capital Markets Limited, Vs. DCIT, D3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, Circle-15(1), New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AADCR5200R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr Advoate Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv Revenue by: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing 16/07/2019 Date of pronouncement 10/10/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an a…

M/S RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1881/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: PendingITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

NEHA HOME BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. CIT - 13, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2964/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm M/S. Neha Home Builders Pvt. Vs. Cit-13, Mumbai Ltd., 801, Hubtown Solaris, N.S.Phadke Marg Off. Teli Galli, Near Andheri Flyover Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 069 Pan/Gir No. Aaccn7092E Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 115JSection 263Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM M/s. Neha Home Builders Pvt. Vs. CIT-13, Mumbai Ltd., 801, Hubtown Solaris, N.S.Phadke Marg Off. Teli Galli, Near Andheri Flyover Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 069 PAN/GIR No. AACCN7092E Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vimal Punmiya Revenue by Shri C.S. Gulati Date of Hearing 28/11/2017 Date of Pronouncement 22/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C. SHARMA (A.M): This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT-13, Mumbai dated 30/03/2016 for A.Y.2011-12 in the matter of order passed…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-1) vs. LATE SHRI SUDHIR SAREEN

ITA/284/2015HC Delhi06 Jul 2015

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

Section 375

…Page 98 of 193 1962 SCC OnLine US SC 40, at page 711, Clark, J.; also see A.K. Roy v. Union of India, (1982) 1 SCC 271, paragraphs 26-27; and Madhav Rao Jivaji Rao Scindia v. Union of India, (1971) 1 SCC 85, paragraph 45.] 127. Furthermore, for my part, this submission also represents, if I may say so, a half-truth. If it was a question concerning an economic policy or economic theory, I would easily defer to the wisdom of the Executive of the day and/or the Legislature as it is essentially experimental and requires a "play in the joints". [See R…

M/S SANKHLA POLYMERS (P) LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2)

In the result, the appeal relating to the assessment

ITA/1100/2006HC Karnataka29 Jan 2013

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 115JSection 148Section 260ASection 80

…ith regard to understanding of a non- obstante clause incorporated into the statute and as interpreted earlier and which has been followed by a Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court in the case of MADHAV RAO JIVAJI RAO SCINDIA vs UNION OF INDIA [(1971) 1 SCC 85], relevant portion of which, as extracted in the former decision, reads as under: In Madhav Rao Jivaji Rao Scindia v. Union of India [1971] 1 SCC 85 Hidayatullah, C.J. observed that the non obstante clause is no doubt a very potent clause intended to exclude every consideration arising from other provisions of the same statute or other s…