Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448: (2009) 5 SCC (Civ) 9071) 14. In P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka

4 SCC 578Reported decision1981#15802 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Judgments citing Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448: (2009) 5 SCC (Civ) 9071) 14. In P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 6, New Delhi vs. Nec Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 7392/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR

Section 143Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…(1973) 2 SCC 705] and Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Jalgaon Medium Project [Pundlik Jalam Patil v. Jalgaon Medium Project, (2008) 17 SCC 448: (2009) 5 SCC (Civ) 9071) 14. In P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka [P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka, (2002) 4 SCC 578: 2002 SCC (Cri) 830] this Court held that judicially engrafting principles of limitation amounts to legislating and would fly in the face of law laid down by the Constitution Bench in Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. Nayuk Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, (1992) 1 SCC 225: 1992 SCC (Cri) 931. Page 18 of 24 ITA No.- 7392/Del/2017 M/s NEC Technologie…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central-1 vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd

ITA/52/2024HC Delhi03 Apr 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

…ITA 52/2024 & connected matters Page 1 of 179 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 22 February, 2024 Judgment pronounced on: 03 April, 2024 + ITA 52/2024 THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL-1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC with Ms. Deeksha Gupta, Adv. versus OJJUS MEDICARE PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor, Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Mr. Tarun Chanana, Mr. Shivam Yadav, Mr. Vibhu Jain, Mr. Utkarsa…

Income Tax Officer vs. Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia

C.A. No.-000911-000911 - 2022Supreme Court06 Apr 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

…ess Profits Tax [(1955) 27 ITR 20 (SC)] and Gursahai Saigal v. CIT [(1963) 48 ITR 1 (SC)]; CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons [(1994) 6 SCC 623]; CIT v. National Taj Traders [(1980) 1 SCC 370]; Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. CTO [(1981) 4 SCC 578]). Francis Bennion in Bennion on Statutory Interpretation, 5th Edn., Lexis Nexis in support of the aforesaid proposition put forth as an illustration that since charge CIVIL APPEAL NO. 911 OF 2022 Page 60 of 67 made by the legislator in procedural provisions is excepted to be for the genera…

M/S. Steel Authority of India Ltd. (Unit Bhilai Steel Plant) Ispat Bhawan . Through Its Sr. Manager (F and A) vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Raipur

C.A. No.-002150-002150 - 2012Supreme Court08 May 2019

Bench: Us. 2. Very Briefly Put, The Question Which We Are Called Upon To Consider & Resolve Is As To Whether Interest Is Payable On The Differential Excise Duty With Retrospective Effect That Become Payable On The Basis Of Escalation Clause Under Section 11Ab Of The Central Excise Act, 1944 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”). 3. In This Batch Of Appeals, We Will Treat C.A. No.2150/2012 As The Leading Case. We Will Refer To The Said Case As The Sail Case. In The Said Case Originally, The Appellant Company Which Is Manufacturer Of Various Products Including Rail

Section 11Section 11A

…1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2150 OF 2012 M/S. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. ..APPELLANT(S) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIPUR ..RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.2562/2012 CIVIL APPEAL NO.600/2013 CIVIL APPEAL NO.1522-23/2013 CIVIL APPEAL NO.599/2013 JUDGMENT K.M. JOSEPH, J. 1. A Bench of two judges doubted the correctness of the judgment rendered by a Bench of two learned judges of this Court in CCE v. SKF India Ltd. 2009 (13) SCC 461 (hereinafter referred to as Digitally signed by DEEPAK G…

Commissioner of Income Tax 5 Mumbai vs. M/S. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. Through Its Manager

C.A. No.-002165-002165 - 2012Supreme Court31 Jan 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 14A

…1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2165 OF 2012 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 MUMBAI … APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S. ESSAR TELEHOLDINGS LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGER … RESPONDENT(S) WITH C.A.No.1429 of 2018 @ SLP(C) No. 36560 of 2012, C.A. No. 117 of 2015, C.A. No. 5101 of 2012, C.A. No. 118 of 2015, C.A. No. 6727 of 2015, C.A. No. 119 of 2015, C.A. No. 116 of 2015, C.A. No. 194 of 2015, C.A. No. 114 of 2015, C.A. No. 120 of 2015, C.A. No. 7395 of 2012, C.A. No. 7394 of 2012, C.A. No. 121 of 2015,…

M/S. Steel Authority of India Ltd. (Unit Bhilai Steel Plant) Ispat Bhawan . Through Its Sr. Manager (F and A) vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Raipur

C.A. No.-002150-002150 - 2012Supreme Court07 Dec 2015

Section 11ASection 4

…Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. CIT, (1986) 3 SCC 461, all that the Court pointed out was that provision for charging interest was, it seems, introduced in order to compensate for the loss occasioned to the 5 (1994) 4 SCC 276 6 (1981) 4 SCC 578 Civil Appeal No. 2150 of 2012 & Ors. Page 26 of 29 Page 27 JUDGMENT 27 Revenue due to delay. But then interest was charged on the strength of a statutory provision may be its objective was to compensate the Revenue for delay in payment of tax. But regardless of the reason which impelled the Legislature to provide for chargin…