Mathuram Agrawal v. State of Madhya Pradesh

8 SCC 667Supreme Court of India1999#1613 most cited

What is Mathuram Agrawal v. State of Madhya Pradesh authority for?

The case distinguishes between legitimate tax planning and transactions that are colourable devices or shams, affirming that while legal arrangements to reduce tax are permissible, transactions lacking legitimacy and designed purely to evade tax are not.

70

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2004 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mathuram Agrawal · 8 SCC 667 · colourable device · sham transaction · tax planning vs evasion · legal arrangements · sections 35D · 40(a)(i) · 14A · 143(3)

Sections most often in play

Section 35DSection 40(a)(i)Section 80HHCSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 28(iiid)Section 35(2AB)Section 35

Issues it is cited on

section 35dcolourable devicewritten down valueblock of assetssection 2(47)short term capital gainsbusiness connectionsection 40(a)(i)section 35put to useenduring benefitshort term capital gain

Judgments citing Mathuram Agrawal v. State of Madhya Pradesh

DCIT Cen Cir 8(1), Mumbai vs. Indra Gaggar, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 808/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.808, 1295, 1294, 1296 & 809/M/2015 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2011-12) िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Dcit Cen Cir 8(1), Smt. Indra Gaggar, R.No.656, 6Th Floor, 41-42, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Gaurav Extension, M.K. Road, Film City Road., बनाम/Vs. बनाम बनाम बनाम Mumbai – 400 020 Gokuldham, Goregaon (East), Mumbai – 400 063 Pan: Afxpg3889B (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) ("&यथ% "&यथ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% "&यथ% "&यथ% Present For: Assessee By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.R. Revenue By : Shri P. Ghosh, D.R. सुनवाई क' तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.11.2016 सुनवाई क' तारीख सुनवाई क' तारीख सुनवाई क' तारीख घोषणा क' तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2016 घोषणा क' तारीख घोषणा क' तारीख घोषणा क' तारीख आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P. Ghosh, D.R
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 27Section 31Section 68

…sally applicable, as has been held in the following cases :- i) Union of India Vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706(SC) ii) CWT Vs. Arvind Narottam 173 ITR 479 (SC) iii) Banyan & Berry Vs. CIT 222 ITR 831 (Guj) iv) Mathuram Agarwal Vs. State of Madhyapradesh 8 SCC 667 We also found that the documents filed by the assessee along with case laws were forwarded by CIT(A) for remand report to the AO vide letter dated 16-12-2013 and vide letter dated 31-12-2013, the AO sent his remand report. Copy of which was given by CIT(A) to the assessee and after calling for assessee’s reply on the remand report, the CIT(A) dele…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. M/s Indur Green Power Private Limited

ITTA/627/2015HC Telangana02 Jun 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Commnr., Central Excise & Customs, Kerala vs. M/S. Larsen & Toubro Ltd

Appeals are disposed of

C.A. No.-006770-006770 - 2004Supreme Court20 Aug 2015

…ra 72) 32 Page 33 JUDGMENT 20. We also find that the assessees’ argument that there is no charge to tax of works contracts in the Finance Act, 1994 is correct in view of what has been stated above. 21. This Court in Mathuram Agrawal v. State of M.P., (1999) 8 SCC 667, held:- “Another question that arises for consideration in this connection is whether sub-section (1) of Section 127-A and the proviso to sub-section (2)(b) should be construed together and the annual letting values of all the buildings owned by a person to be taken together for determining the amount to be paid as tax in respect of each building.…

Commnr., Central Excise & Customs, Kerala vs. M/S. Larsen & Toubro Ltd

Appeals are disposed of

C.A. No.-006770-006770 - 2004Supreme Court20 Aug 2015

…ra 72) 32 Page 33 JUDGMENT 20. We also find that the assessees’ argument that there is no charge to tax of works contracts in the Finance Act, 1994 is correct in view of what has been stated above. 21. This Court in Mathuram Agrawal v. State of M.P., (1999) 8 SCC 667, held:- “Another question that arises for consideration in this connection is whether sub-section (1) of Section 127-A and the proviso to sub-section (2)(b) should be construed together and the annual letting values of all the buildings owned by a person to be taken together for determining the amount to be paid as tax in respect of each building.…

Commnr. of Central Excise, Chandigarh vs. M/S. Doaba Steel Rolling Mills

The appeals are allowed accordingly with costs,

C.A. No.-003400-003400 - 2003Supreme Court06 Jul 2011
Section 3Section 35HSection 3A

…principles to be applied while interpreting a fiscal statute. Therefore, bearing in mind these principles and the intent and effect of the statutory provisions, analysed above, the conclusion becomes inevitable that Rule 5 of the 1997 Rules will 7 (1999) 8 SCC 667 1 be attracted for determination of the annual capacity of production of the factory when any change in the installed machinery or any part thereof is intimated to the Commissioner of Central Excise in terms of Rule 4(2) of the said Rules. 24.As regards the argument of learned counsel for the respondents that having not assailed the correctne…

CIT vs. Bishan Saroop Ram Kishan Agro Pvt Ltd

ITA/1775/2010HC Delhi27 May 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

…tention of the legislature in a taxation statute is to be gathered from the language of the provisions particularly where the language is plain and unambiguous. 13. The Supreme Court in the case of Mathuram Aggarwal v State of Madhya Pradesh, 8 SCC 667[1999] held that, “In a taxing Act it is not possible to assume any intention or governing purpose of the statute more than what is stated in the plain language. It is not the economic results sought to be obtained by making the provision which is relevant in interpreting a fiscal statute. Equally impermissible is an interpretation which d…

CIT vs. Bishan Saroop Ram Kishan Agro Pvt Ltd

ITA - 2032 / 2010HC Delhi27 May 2011

…lature in a taxation statute is to be gathered from the language of the provisions particularly where the language is plain and unambiguous. ![](_page_20_Picture_3.jpeg) 13. The Supreme Court in the case of *Mathuram Aggarwal* v *State* of *Madhya Pradesh*, 8 SCC 667[1999] held that, "In a taxing Act it is not possible to assume any intention or governing purpose of the statute more than what is stated in the plain language. It is not the economic results sought to be obtained by making the provision which is relevant in interpreting a fiscal statute. Equally impermissible is an interpretation which does not f…

CIT vs. Ram Kishan Dass

ITA - 1790 / 2010HC Delhi27 May 2011

…ons. The intention of the legislature in a taxation statute is to be gathered from the language of the provisions particularly where the language is plain and unambiguous. - 13. The Supreme Court in the case of *Mathuram Aggarwal v State* of *Madhya Pradesh*, 8 SCC 667[1999] held that, "In a taxing Act it is not possible to assume any intention or governing purpose of the statute more than what is stated in the plain language. It is not the economic results sought to be obtained by making the provision which is relevant in interpreting a fiscal statute. Equally impermissible is an interpretation which does not f…

CIT vs. Bishan Saroop Ram Kishan Agro Pvt Ltd

ITA - 1775 / 2010HC Delhi27 May 2011

…tention of the legislature in a taxation statute is to be gathered from the language of the provisions particularly where the language is plain and unambiguous. 13. The Supreme Court in the case of Mathuram Aggarwal v State of Madhya Pradesh, 8 SCC 667[1999] held that, “In a taxing Act it is not possible to assume any intention or governing purpose of the statute more than what is stated in the plain language. It is not the economic results sought to be obtained by making the provision which is relevant in interpreting a fiscal statute. Equally impermissible is an interpretation which d…

Commnr. of Central Excise, Pondicherry vs. M/S. Acer India Ltd

C.A. No.-010185-010186 - 2003Supreme Court24 Sept 2004
For Respondent: M/s. ACER India Ltd
Section 11ASection 4

…http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 15 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 10185-10186 of 2003 PETITIONER: Commnr. Of Central Excise, Pondicherry RESPONDENT: M/s. ACER India Ltd. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/09/2004 BENCH: N. Santosh Hegde,S.B. Sinha & Tarun Chatterje JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T With C.A. Nos. 1148-1149 of 2004 & I.A. Nos. 3-4/2004 S.B. SINHA, J: The Revenue is in appeal before us being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 29.08.2003 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, S…