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 366,470 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

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. DCIT(TDS), Raipur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 207/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. DCIT(TDS), Raipur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 206/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. DCIT(TDS), Raipur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 205/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. DCIT(TDS), Raipur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 204/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. DCIT(TDS), Raipur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 203/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. DCIT(TDS), Raipur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 202/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. ITO(TDS), Bilaspur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 201/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. ITO(TDS), Bilaspur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 200/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. ITO(TDS), Bilaspur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 199/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. ITO(TDS), Bilaspur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 198/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur vs. ITO(TDS), Bilaspur

Appeals stands PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 197/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

…cer for fresh assessment. Going by stricter application / interpretation of law as laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Koreas India Ltd.’ reported in AIR 1977 SC 132 and further in the landmark case of ‘Dilip Kumar Vs CCE’ reported 9 SCC 1 we are mindful to hold that, while dealing with the first appeals unless the order under challenge before the first appellate authority order is framed ex-parte by the assessing officer u/s 144 of the Act, any action of remanding any subject, ITAT-Raipur Page 12 of 16 SECL Group Vs ACIT(TDS), Raipur ITA No. 197 to 223 & 275 to 301/RPR/2025, AY 201…

DCIT Cen Cir 1(4), Mumbai vs. Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the assessee are partly allowed, and the additional ground of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4069/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry – Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta - CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 260ASection 43BSection 45Section 801ASection 801A(4)

…e through notes to the return of income. It is also contained by the Ld. DR that Provisions dealing with the deductions have to be strictly construed in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs vs. Dilip Kumar (9 SCC 1) 2018. It is also contended by the Ld. DR that merely because claim has been allowed by the assessing officer in assessment year 2015-16, deduction has to be permitted in assessment year 2010-11 cannot be accepted, as principles of res judicata do not apply to income tax law. 67. The Ld. AR argued that the distinction sought to be made by the Ld. DR…

Grasim Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the assessee are partly allowed,

ITA 2897/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry – Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta - CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 260ASection 43BSection 45Section 801ASection 801A(4)

…e through notes to the return of income. It is also contained by the Ld. DR that Provisions dealing with the deductions have to be strictly construed in light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs vs. Dilip Kumar (9 SCC 1) 2018. It is also contended by the Ld. DR that merely because claim has been allowed by the assessing officer in assessment year 2015-16, deduction has to be permitted in assessment year 2010-11 cannot be accepted, as principles of res judicata do not apply to income tax law. 67. The Ld. AR argued that the distinction sought to be made by the Ld. DR…

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1637/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…t. 16. At this juncture, it would be relevant to take note of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, relied by the Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577/2018] 9 SCC 1. The Constitution Bench was set up to examine the correctness of the ratio in Sun Export Corpn. v Collector of Customs 1997 taxmann.com 696/1997 (93) ELT. 641 (SC)/([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…

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1636/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…t. 16. At this juncture, it would be relevant to take note of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, relied by the Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577/2018] 9 SCC 1. The Constitution Bench was set up to examine the correctness of the ratio in Sun Export Corpn. v Collector of Customs 1997 taxmann.com 696/1997 (93) ELT. 641 (SC)/([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…

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1635/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…t. 16. At this juncture, it would be relevant to take note of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, relied by the Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577/2018] 9 SCC 1. The Constitution Bench was set up to examine the correctness of the ratio in Sun Export Corpn. v Collector of Customs 1997 taxmann.com 696/1997 (93) ELT. 641 (SC)/([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…

Vijay Tukaram Raundal, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

ITA 1634/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Mihir NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 115JSection 131Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…t. 16. At this juncture, it would be relevant to take note of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, relied by the Id. DR. in Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577/2018] 9 SCC 1. The Constitution Bench was set up to examine the correctness of the ratio in Sun Export Corpn. v Collector of Customs 1997 taxmann.com 696/1997 (93) ELT. 641 (SC)/([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…

Kn Support Services Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5774/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalkn Support Services Pvt.Ltd., Dcit, 30Th Floor, M3M International Circle 1(1), Financial Centre, Tower-1, Vs. Gurgaon, Golf Course Extensions Road, Haryana Sector 66, Badshapur, Haryana -122101. Pan-Aajck0720B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115Section 115BSection 115JSection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

…filing the Form 10IC as well as the return of income which was also field after the due date u/s 139(1) of the Act. This appears to be an exceptional circumstances and deserves to be considered. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Dilip Kumar 9. (2018) 9 SCC 1 (FB, SC), while deciding the Doctrine of Substantial Compliance held as under: "33. A fiscal statute generally seeks to preserve the need to comply strictly with regulatory requirements that are important, especially when a party seeks the benefits of an exemption clause that are important. Substantial compliance with an enactment is insisted, where…

Kworks Technologies Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5773/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalkworks Technologies Private Dcit, Limited, 30Th Floor, M3M Circle 1(1), International Financial Centre, Vs. Gurgaon, Tower-1, Golf Course Extensions Haryana Road, Sector 66, Badshapur, Haryana -122101. Pan-Aajck0865H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 115JSection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

…in filing the Form 10IC as well as the return of income which was also field after the due date u/s 139(1) of the Act. This appears to be exceptional circumstances and deserves to be considered. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Dilip Kumar 9. (2018) 9 SCC 1 (FB, SC), while deciding the Doctrine of Substantial Compliance held as under: "33. A fiscal statute generally seeks to preserve the need to comply strictly with regulatory requirements that are important, especially when a party seeks the benefits of an exemption clause that are important. Substantial compliance with an enactment is insisted, where…

The Katohar Khurd Co-Op Agriculture Service Scoiety Limited, Amb vs. Income Tax Officer, Una

ITA 197/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Poplani (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar (CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 69ASection 80ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…which provide that to claim such a deduction, the return of income must be filed before due date u/s 139(1). The assessee has failed to fulfill this mandatory condition. Considering the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Dilip Kumar & Co. (9 SCC 1), in the absence of any valid return of income u/s 139(1), this deduction has rightly been denied to the assessee. We confirm the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. 6. In the additional grounds of appeal No.3, the assessee assail the impugned addition of interest on the ground that the same do not form part of reasons for reopening and further…