Madras in CIT v. K.E. Sundara Mudaliar

18 ITR 259High Court1950#17106 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)

Judgments citing Madras in CIT v. K.E. Sundara Mudaliar

SYED MOHAMED SATHIK ALI,DINDIGUL vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), DINDIGUL

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

ITA 2362/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2362/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Syed Mohamed Sathik Ali, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, C/O Shri T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate, Ward 1(3), # 384 (Old No. 196), Lloyds Road, Dindigul. Chennai 600 086. [Pan: Ajdps6560R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. Cit (Virtual) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.06.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Nashik For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Raised 5 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Addition Made As Income From Capital Gains

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. CIT (Virtual)
Section 143(3)

…y/25 (i) CIT vs. Raja Benoy Kumar Sahas Roy ( 31 ITR 426 ) wherein it was held that "some basic operation prior to germination involving application of human effort on the land itself was necessary to constitute agriculture". (ii) CIT vs. Sundara Mudaliyar ( 18 ITR 259 ) wherein it was pointed out that "irrespective of the nature of the produce or the product of the land whatever is grown on land aided by human labour and effort, whatever does not grow wild or spontaneously on soil without human labour or effort, would constitute "agricultural produce". 14.2. The shade trees that have been cut/sized and sold are…

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S BRITISH AGRO PRODUCTS (INDIA) PVT LTD , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is dismissed

ITA 970/CHNY/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkery, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 969 & 970/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. British Agro Products Income Tax, V. (India) Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle -1(1), No. 9, State Bank Officers Chennai – 600 034. Colony, Shastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai – 600 020. [Pan: Aafcb-8238-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. M. Rajan, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, FCA
Section 2

…On perusal of the decision in the case of DCIT vs Inventaa (supra) it is noted that the Hon'ble Bench has discussed several judgements of the Jurisdictional High Court of Madras while deciding the case. Two of such cases are CITv. K.E. Sundara Mudaliar [1950] 18 ITR 259 (MAD.) and Commissioner of Income-tax v. Soundarya Nursery (2000| 241 TR 530 (Madras) . Consideration of the above two cases of jurisdictional High Courts in length in the decision of DCIT Vs Inventaa (supra) becomes relevant in comparison to the decision of non jurisdictional High Couts and Tribunal on different facts. 5.35 In view of the above d…

DCIT , CHENNAI vs. M/S BRITISH AGRO PRODUCTS (INDIA) PVT LTD , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is dismissed

ITA 969/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkery, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 969 & 970/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. British Agro Products Income Tax, V. (India) Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle -1(1), No. 9, State Bank Officers Chennai – 600 034. Colony, Shastri Nagar, Adyar, Chennai – 600 020. [Pan: Aafcb-8238-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. M. Rajan, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Y. Sridhar, FCA
Section 2

…On perusal of the decision in the case of DCIT vs Inventaa (supra) it is noted that the Hon'ble Bench has discussed several judgements of the Jurisdictional High Court of Madras while deciding the case. Two of such cases are CITv. K.E. Sundara Mudaliar [1950] 18 ITR 259 (MAD.) and Commissioner of Income-tax v. Soundarya Nursery (2000| 241 TR 530 (Madras) . Consideration of the above two cases of jurisdictional High Courts in length in the decision of DCIT Vs Inventaa (supra) becomes relevant in comparison to the decision of non jurisdictional High Couts and Tribunal on different facts. 5.35 In view of the above d…

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFICER,WARD II(4), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 119/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 38/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 77/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Bansal, DR
Section 43B

…rpretations to a Section. (a) Vegetable Products Ltd., 88 ITR 192 (S.C.) (b) Bajaj Tempo Ltd. vs. CIT(1992) 196 ITR 188 (S.C.) (c) CIT vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd. (1992) 196 ITR 149, 153 (SC) (d) CIT 1/5. K.E.Sundara Mudaiiar (1950) 18 ITR 259 (Mad.) 18 ITR 259. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee, in the light of facts and the judicial authorities relied upon supra, deserves to be allowed in full.” 7. On the other hand, the departmental representative relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the lower authorities and materials ava…

SH. VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL, PROP.,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 38/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 38/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 77/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Bansal, DR
Section 43B

…rpretations to a Section. (a) Vegetable Products Ltd., 88 ITR 192 (S.C.) (b) Bajaj Tempo Ltd. vs. CIT(1992) 196 ITR 188 (S.C.) (c) CIT vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd. (1992) 196 ITR 149, 153 (SC) (d) CIT 1/5. K.E.Sundara Mudaiiar (1950) 18 ITR 259 (Mad.) 18 ITR 259. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee, in the light of facts and the judicial authorities relied upon supra, deserves to be allowed in full.” 7. On the other hand, the departmental representative relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the lower authorities and materials ava…

Madras in CIT v. K.E. Sundara Mudaliar (18 ITR 259) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax