MALPE VISHWANATH ACHARYA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER. 365 32

9 SCC 1Supreme Court of India2018#121 most cited
532

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2006 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 144Section 37(1)Section 133(6)Section 201Section 201(1A)Section 44AB

Issues it is cited on

section 264asection 44aasection 264section 192section 17section 251(1)section 251(1)(a)assessee in defaultsection 201(1)section 251section 201section 44ab

Judgments citing MALPE VISHWANATH ACHARYA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER. 365 32

Mahaveer Bulk Carriers, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1000/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2023AY 2019-20
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel (DR.)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…udgments, such as CIT v. Ace Multi Axes Systems Ltd. [2017] 88 taxmann.com 69/[2018] 252 Taxman 274/400 ITR 141 (SC)/[2018] 2 SCC 158. 50. The Constitution Bench, in Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239 (SC)/[2018] 9 SCC 1 endorsed as following: "24. In construing penal statutes and taxation statutes, the Court has to apply strict rule of interpretation. The penal statute which tends to deprive a person of right to life and liberty has to be given strict interpretation or else many innocents might become victims of discretionary decision-making. Insofar as taxation sta…

M/S. Micro Labs Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Nisha Padma, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 14ASection 35Section 35(2)(AB)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2010-11 M/s. Micro Labs Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner 27, K.C.N. Towers, of Income Tax, LTU, Race Course Road, Bangalore. Bangalore. PAN: AABCM 2131N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri S. Parthasarathi, Advocate Respondent by : Smt. Nisha Padma, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 22.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S., Accountant Member This appeal of the assessee arises out of the dir…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle -2, Nashik vs. Naresh J. Karda, Nashik

ITA 800/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmashali

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Milind JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar &
Section 143(3)

…tered as well as beneficial shareholder attracts the same in the nature of dividends to the extent of the accumulated profits derived by the lender concerned. We keeping in mind the same and quote hon’ble apex court’s Commissioner vs. Dilip Kumar & Co. [2018] 9 SCC 1 (SC) (FB) that such a deeming fiction in a taxing statute indeed deserves to be strictly interpreted only. We proceed further and find that there is no material before us which could dispute the assessee’s ledger accounts of the corresponding loan advance(s) transaction between M/s. SSLDIPL and M/s. Karda Constructions. We are of the opinion that suc…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle -2, Nashik vs. Naresh J. Karda, Nashik

ITA 799/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmashali

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Milind JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar &
Section 143(3)

…tered as well as beneficial shareholder attracts the same in the nature of dividends to the extent of the accumulated profits derived by the lender concerned. We keeping in mind the same and quote hon’ble apex court’s Commissioner vs. Dilip Kumar & Co. [2018] 9 SCC 1 (SC) (FB) that such a deeming fiction in a taxing statute indeed deserves to be strictly interpreted only. We proceed further and find that there is no material before us which could dispute the assessee’s ledger accounts of the corresponding loan advance(s) transaction between M/s. SSLDIPL and M/s. Karda Constructions. We are of the opinion that suc…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle -2, Nashik vs. Naresh J. Karda, Nashik

ITA 798/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G.D. Padmashali

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Milind JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar &
Section 143(3)

…tered as well as beneficial shareholder attracts the same in the nature of dividends to the extent of the accumulated profits derived by the lender concerned. We keeping in mind the same and quote hon’ble apex court’s Commissioner vs. Dilip Kumar & Co. [2018] 9 SCC 1 (SC) (FB) that such a deeming fiction in a taxing statute indeed deserves to be strictly interpreted only. We proceed further and find that there is no material before us which could dispute the assessee’s ledger accounts of the corresponding loan advance(s) transaction between M/s. SSLDIPL and M/s. Karda Constructions. We are of the opinion that suc…

Shivkumar Sangappa Saboji, Belgaum vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, (International Taxation), Panaji

Appeal is allowed

ITA 160/PAN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji23 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Shivanand HalbhaviFor Respondent: Smt. Neelima Nadkarni, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 54

…gappa Saboji, Belgaum. 4. The Learned DR vehemently argued in light of CIT(A)'s detailed discussion that he has rightly followed ITO vs. Sushila Jhaveri [2007] 107 ITD 327 (Mum.) as well as Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai vs. Dilip Kumar & Co. [2018] 9 SCC 1 (SC) (FB) that such deduction claim of multiple flats is not eligible for deduction. 5. All these Revenue’s arguments hardly deserve to be accepted. This is for the precise reason that the hon’ble Karnataka high court happens to be assessee’s jurisdictional high court which has already settled the issue in many of it’s decisions namely CIT vs., Smt.…

Royal Furnisher, Jammu vs. Assesing Officer Ward- 2 (2), Jammu

In the result appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 54/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…udgments, such as CIT v. Ace Multi Axes Systems Ltd. [2017] 88 taxmann.com 69/[2018] 252 Taxman 274/400 ITR 141 (SC)/[2018] 2 SCC 158. 50. The Constitution Bench, in Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239 (SC)/[2018] 9 SCC 1 endorsed as following: "24. In construing penal statutes and taxation statutes, the Court has to apply strict rule of interpretation. The penal statute which tends to deprive a person of right to life and liberty has to be given strict interpretation or else many innocents might become victims of discretionary decision-making. Insofar as taxation sta…

Muhamma Service Cooperative Bank Limited No 1670, Alappuzha vs. The ITO, Alappuzha

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 264/COCH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalmuhamma Service Co-Op. The Income Tax Officer, Wd -2 Bank Ltd. Alappuzha Vs. Muhamma, Cherthala Alappuzha 688525 Pan –Aacam1602K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kabil Chandran, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80ASection 80P

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member Muhamma Service Co-op. The Income Tax Officer, Wd -2 Bank Ltd. Alappuzha Vs. Muhamma, Cherthala Alappuzha 688525 PAN –AACAM1602K Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Kabil Chandran, Adv Respondent by: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 09.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 19.12.2022 O R D E R Per: S.S. Godara, J.M. This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2018-19arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC) Delhi’s order dated 31.07.2021…

Thannermukkom Service Cooperative Society Limited, Alappuzha vs. ITO Ward 1 & Tps, Alappuzha

ITA 653/COCH/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Kabil Chandran, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80ASection 80P

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Memberand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member ITA Nos.652& 653/Coch/2022 (Assessment Years :2018-19& 2019-20) Thannermukkom Service The Income Tax Officer, Wd -1 Co-operative Society & TDS Limited, No.A 809, Alappuzha Thannermukkom North, Vs. Thannermukkom, Cherthala, Alappuzha, Kerala. PIN 688527 PAN –AACAM1602K Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Kabil Chandran, Adv Respondent by: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 09.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 13.12.2022 O R D E R Per: S.S…

Thannermukkom Service Cooperative Society Limited, Alappuzha vs. ITO Ward 1 & Tps, Alappuzha

ITA 652/COCH/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Kabil Chandran, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80ASection 80P

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Memberand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member ITA Nos.652& 653/Coch/2022 (Assessment Years :2018-19& 2019-20) Thannermukkom Service The Income Tax Officer, Wd -1 Co-operative Society & TDS Limited, No.A 809, Alappuzha Thannermukkom North, Vs. Thannermukkom, Cherthala, Alappuzha, Kerala. PIN 688527 PAN –AACAM1602K Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Kabil Chandran, Adv Respondent by: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 09.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 13.12.2022 O R D E R Per: S.S…

Jagannath Krishnaji Deore, Pune vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Pune

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2091/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & G.D.Padmahshaliआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2091/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 45(2)Section 50C

…ching fact of having used the lands transferred for agricultural purposes for two years immediately preceding the date on which the transfer took place. That being the case, we adopt stricter interpretation in light of CIT Vs. Dilip Kumar and Company (2018) 9 SCC 1 (SC) (FB) to affirm the impugned disallowance made by both the lower authorities. This last substantive ground is declined therefore. 12. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on 07th December, 2022. (G.D.PADMAHSHALI) JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; "दनांक / Dated : 07th December, 2022 Satish 9…

Vinod Kumar Tandon, Allahabad vs. DCIT(CPC), Begaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 29/ALLD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad22 Nov 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…udgments, such as CIT v. Ace Multi Axes Systems Ltd. [2017] 88 taxmann.com 69/[2018] 252 Taxman 274/400 ITR 141 (SC)/[2018] 2 SCC 158. 50. The Constitution Bench, in Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239 (SC)/[2018] 9 SCC 1 endorsed as following: "24. In construing penal statutes and taxation statutes, the Court has to apply strict rule of interpretation. The penal statute which tends to deprive a person of right to life and liberty has to be given strict interpretation or else many innocents might become victims of discretionary decision-making. Insofar as taxation sta…

Kishor Namdevrao Kachi, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 5(2), Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 63/PUN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.63/Pun/2018 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 56Section 56(1)(vii)

…ctive applicability thereof, which substituted earlier clause (b) vide Finance Act, 2013 w.e.f. 01.04.2014 whereas the assessment year before us is 2010-11 only. Faced with this situation, we invoke strict interpretation in light of CIT vs. Dilip Kumar (2018) 9 SCC 1 (FB) (SC) to delete the impugned addition for this precise reason alone. Ordered accordingly. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 17th day of November, 2022. (DR.DIPAK P.RIPOTE) (S.S. GODARA) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्याधयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ददनांक / Dated : 17th No…

Harish Sharma HUF, B-1, Patodiya Marg, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-5(3), Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 318/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Nov 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Chanchal Meena (JCIT)
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,’A’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM deys’k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 318/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2014-15 cuke Harish Sharma HUF ITO, Vs. B-1, Patodiya Marg, Ward-5(3), Shastri Nagar, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEHH 0008 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Cha…

M/S New Noble Educational Society vs. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax 1

The appeals are hereby dismissed, without order on costs

C.A. No.-003795-003795 - 2014Supreme Court19 Oct 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 10

…clear, plain and unambiguous and only one meaning can be inferred, the courts are bound to give effect to the said meaning irrespective of consequences. If the words in 22 Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v. Dilip Kumar and Company & Ors., (2018) 9 SCC 1. 39 the statute are plain and unambiguous, it becomes necessary to expound those words in their natural and ordinary sense. The words used declare the intention of the legislature”. The Court, while noting the nuances between ‘strict’ and ‘literal’ interpretation, held as follows: “29. …We may reiterate at the cost of repetition that…

Neeta Goswami, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1584/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri B. Shanti Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.P.Babu, DR
Section 54

…lication of the circular No. 471 or 672 relied upon by her. Learned AR placed reliance on the decisions reported in Humayun Suleman Merchant Vs. CCIT (2016) 73 taxman.com 2 (Bombay) and Commissioner of Customs (Import) Vs. M/s. Dilip Kumar and Company, (2018) 9 SCC 1 (FB)(SC) in support of his contention that the assessee has to strictly comply with the conditions of section 54 of the Act to claim the deduction Page 3 of 11 therein because strict interpretation is to be adopted whilst construing an exemption provision. 7. Insofar as the additional ground is concerned, it is the argument of the learned DR that u…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 8, Pune vs. Aswani Developers, Pune

ITA 576/PUN/2020[201213]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr.Dipak P.Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.576/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Aswani Developers, Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune Vs Second Floor, S.P. Heights, Mumbai-Pune Road, Kasarwadi, Pune 411 034 Pan : Aarfa0761H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / It(Ss)A Nos.02 & 03/Pun/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Aswani Developers, Income Tax, Vs Second Floor, S.P. Heights, Central Circle-2(2), Pune Mumbai-Pune Road, Kasarwadi, Pune 411 034 Pan : Aarfa0761H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR.DIPAK P.RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.576/PUN/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Aswani Developers, Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune Vs Second Floor, S.P. Heights, Mumbai-Pune Road, Kasarwadi, Pune 411 034 PAN : AARFA0761H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / IT(SS)A Nos.02 & 03/PUN/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Aswani Developers, Income Tax, Vs Second…

Endress + Hauser (India) Automation Instrumentation Pvt.Ltd, Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Aurangabad

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 372/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.372/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Endress + Hauser (India) The Acit, Circle-1, Automation Instrumentation Vs Aurangabad. Pvt. Ltd., . Plot No.M-192, Midc-Waluj, Aurangabad, - 431136. Pan: Aabce 7677 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe – Dr Date Of Hearing 11/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), Pune- 3’S Order Dated 15.01.2019 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit (A)- 3/Cir.3,Pn/347/2017-18, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 143(3)Section 40

…elf assessed income. The Revenue also placed strong reliance on the impugned reasoning. We do not find any substance in its arguments light of stricter interpretation of section 40(a)(ia) 1st proviso in light of Commissioner Vs. Dilip Kumar and Company [2018] 9 SCC 1 (SC)(FB) as once the legislature itself has not incorporated any such precondition for application thereof in the statute. We thus reject the Revenue’s arguments supporting the CIT(A)’s findings and direct the Assessing Officer to grant benefit of section 40(a)(ia) first proviso to ITA No.372/PUN/2019 for A.Y. 2013-14 Endress + Hauser (India) Automat…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Pune vs. Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the

ITA 178/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.178/Pun/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Acit, Circle-2, Vs. Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune Teerth Technospace, 708, C-Wing, Beside Mercedes Benz Showroom, Baner Road, Baner, Pune 411 045 Pan : Aaqpr0124G Appellant Respondent

Section 115JSection 80I

…Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, relied 17 ITA No.178/PUN/2019 and CO No.24/PUN/2021 Vijay Tukaram Raundal by the ld. DR, in Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai Vs. M/s. Dilip Kumar and Company & Others (Civil Appeal No.3327/2007) (2018) 9 SCC 1 dated 30.7.2018. The Constitution Bench was set up to examine the correctness of the ratio in Sun Export Corporation, Bombay Vs. Collector of Customs, Bombay (1997) 6 SCC 564 and the question posed before it was- `What is the interpretative rule to be applied while interpreting a tax exemption provision/notification when there is ambiguity as to…

Shivtara Associates, Pune vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax (Central), Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 221/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & G.D. Padmahshalim/S. Shivtara Associates Pr,. Cit, Central 114/115 First Floor Aayakar Sadan Connaught Place Vs. Bodhi Towers, Salisbury Park Bund Garden Gultekadi, Pune 411037 Pune 411001 Pan –Abufs6026K Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Abhay Avachat Respondent By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 18.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.08.2022 O R D E R Per S.S. Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Ay 2016-17 Arises Against The Pcit (Central), Pune’S Order Dated 31.03.2021 Passed In Case No. Pcit (Central), Pune/Revision-263/100000195682/2021, Involving Proceedings Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The Act).

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AvachatFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 144Section 263Section 43C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND G.D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Shivtara Associates Pr,. CIT, Central 114/115 First Floor Aayakar Sadan Connaught Place Vs. Bodhi Towers, Salisbury Park Bund Garden Gultekadi, Pune 411037 Pune 411001 PAN –ABUFS6026K Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Abhay Avachat Respondent by: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date of Hearing: 18.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 26.08.2022 O R D E R Per S.S. Godara, JM This assessee’s appeal for AY 2016-17 arises against the PCIT (Central), Pune’s order dated 31.03.2021 passed i…