Moti Ram v. Param Dev

2 SCC 725Supreme Court of India2007#6289 most cited

What is Moti Ram v. Param Dev authority for?

A party has a unilateral right to relinquish their rights and privileges, and such relinquishment becomes complete and operative when the relinquisher, through a concomitant act, makes good their intention, especially when the statute does not require another person to accept the relinquishment.

18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Moti Ram v. Param Dev · unilateral relinquishment · giving up rights · operative relinquishment · concomitant act · no statutory acceptance · Section 12AA(4)

Judgments citing Moti Ram v. Param Dev

The Commissioner of Income Tax -International Taxation-1 vs. Reema Chawla

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/168/2024HC Delhi11 Mar 2024

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

Section 54

…$~78 & 79 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 168/2024 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus REEMA CHAWLA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Samarth Chaudhari, Adv. 79 + ITA 169/2024 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus ANIL CHAWLA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra,…

The Commissioner of Income Tax -International Taxation-1 vs. Reema Chawla

Appeals are dismissed

ITA - 168 / 2024HC Delhi11 Mar 2024
Section 54

…$~78 & 79 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 168/2024 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus REEMA CHAWLA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Samarth Chaudhari, Adv. 79 + ITA 169/2024 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus ANIL CHAWLA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra,…

R D Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 17, Mumbai

ITA 7242/MUM/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 11Section 115TSection 12A

…in section 12AA(4). This too, according to the learned counsel, indicate that it is not necessary that a formal order be passed under section 12AA(4). 23. It is then contended that, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Moti Ram Vs Param Dev [(1993) 2 SCC 725 (SC)], doctrine of unilateral relinquishment permits a person to give up its rights and privileges, and having done so, it is not necessary for anyone to recognize or give effect to such relinquishment. In such cases, relinquishment becomes complete and operative when relinquisher, by a concomitant act makes good his intention of relinquishment. In…

Tata Education Trust, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 17, Mumbai

ITA 7241/MUM/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2021AY 2019-20
Section 11Section 115TSection 12A

…35 section 12AA(4). This too, according to the learned counsel, indicate that it is not necessary that a formal order be passed under section 12AA(4). 23. It is then contended that, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Moti Ram Vs Param Dev [(1993) 2 SCC 725 (SC)], doctrine of unilateral relinquishment permits a person to give up its rights and privileges, and having done so, it is not necessary for anyone to recognize or give effect to such relinquishment. In such cases, relinquishment becomes complete and operative when relinquisher, by a concomitant act makes good his intention of relinquishment. In…

Sarvajanik Seva Trust, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 17, Mumbai

ITA 7240/MUM/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 11Section 115TSection 12A

…in section 12AA(4). This too, according to the learned counsel, indicate that it is not necessary that a formal order be passed under section 12AA(4). 23. It is then contended that, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Moti Ram Vs Param Dev [(1993) 2 SCC 725 (SC)], doctrine of unilateral relinquishment permits a person to give up its rights and privileges, and having done so, it is not necessary for anyone to recognize or give effect to such relinquishment. In such cases, relinquishment becomes complete and operative when relinquisher, by a concomitant act makes good his intention of relinquishment. In…

Jamsetji Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 17, Mumbai

ITA 7239/MUM/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 11Section 115TSection 12A

…in section 12AA(4). This too, according to the learned counsel, indicate that it is not necessary that a formal order be passed under section 12AA(4). 23. It is then contended that, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Moti Ram Vs Param Dev [(1993) 2 SCC 725 (SC)], doctrine of unilateral relinquishment permits a person to give up its rights and privileges, and having done so, it is not necessary for anyone to recognize or give effect to such relinquishment. In such cases, relinquishment becomes complete and operative when relinquisher, by a concomitant act makes good his intention of relinquishment. In…

Navajbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 17, Mumbai

ITA 7238/MUM/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Page 2 Of 47 1 A) The Impugned Order Dated 31.10.2019 Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax-17 ('Pcit') Under Section 12Aa(3)/(4) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ('Ita') Cancelling The Registration Of The Appellant Is Without Jurisdiction And, Hence, Void Ab Initio.

Section 11Section 115TSection 12ASection 12A(3)

…n section 12AA(4). This too, according to the learned counsel, indicate that it is not necessary that a formal order be passed under section 12AA(4). 23. It is then contended that, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Moti Ram Vs Param Dev [(1993) 2 SCC 725 (SC)], doctrine of unilateral relinquishment permits a person to give up its rights and privileges, and having done so, it is not necessary for anyone to recognize or give effect to such relinquishment. In such cases, relinquishment becomes complete and operative when relinquisher, by a concomitant act makes good his intention of relinquishment. In…

Tata Social Welfare Trust, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 17, Mumbai

ITA 7237/MUM/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Us, Are As Follows: Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 11Section 115TSection 12A

…in section 12AA(4). This too, according to the learned counsel, indicate that it is not necessary that a formal order be passed under section 12AA(4). 23. It is then contended that, as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Moti Ram Vs Param Dev [(1993) 2 SCC 725 (SC)], doctrine of unilateral relinquishment permits a person to give up its rights and privileges, and having done so, it is not necessary for anyone to recognize or give effect to such relinquishment. In such cases, relinquishment becomes complete and operative when relinquisher, by a concomitant act makes good his intention of relinquishment. In…

Kapil Kumar Agarwal, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2630/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishikapil Kumar Agarwal, Vs. Dcit, C/O. Ipsaa House Anm & Circle-1(1), Associates, J021A, Mayfiled Gurgaoon Gardens, Sector-51, Gurgaon Pan: Aacpa2412L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Sugandha Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 54Section 54F

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kapil Kumar Agarwal, Vs. DCIT, C/o. IPSAA House ANM & Circle-1(1), Associates, J021A, Mayfiled Gurgaoon Gardens, Sector-51, Gurgaon PAN: AACPA2412L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Piyush Kaushik, Adv Revenue by: Smt Sugandha Sharma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07/03/2019 Date of pronouncement 30/04/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee, individual against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 1, Gu…

ACIT, Cir-32, Kolkata vs. Jitendra Seth, Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1420/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2012-13 Acit, Circle-32, Jitendra Seth बनाम 10B, Middleton Row, 87, Karnani Estate, 209, / 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-71 V/S. A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700 017 [Pan No.Ajhs 9552 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Challenges Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata’S Order Dated 31.03.2016 Passed In Case No. 749/Cit(A)-9/Cir-32/2014-15/Kol, Reversing Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing Assessee’S Commission Paid Of ₹51,56,694/- As Well As Partly Restricting Section 54F Deduction Disallowance To ₹42,39,181/- Out Of ₹56,52,242/-; Respectively, Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’ Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 54F

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2012-13 ACIT, Circle-32, Jitendra Seth बनाम 10B, Middleton Row, 87, Karnani Estate, 209, / 2nd Floor, Kolkata-71 V/s. A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-700 017 [PAN No.AJHS 9552 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT-SR-DR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Miraj D Shah, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 04-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 27-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pron…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 11 (1) Bangalore vs. M/S Ace Multi Axes Systems Ltd

Appeals are disposed of in the same terms

C.A. No.-020854-020854 - 2017Supreme Court05 Dec 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL

Section 263Section 33BSection 80

…1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 20854 OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.4565 OF 2015) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 11 (1), BANGALORE …APPELLANT VERSUS M/S. ACE MULTI AXES SYSTEMS LTD. ...RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 20856 OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.8331 OF 2016) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 20857 OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.3323 OF 2016) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 20855 OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.148 OF 2016) J U…

M/S Star Industries vs. Commissioner of Customs(Imports) Raigad

C.A. No.-006088-006088 - 2013Supreme Court07 Oct 2015
Section 108Section 110Section 111Section 3(1)

…Page 1 JUDGMENT REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6088 OF 2013 M/S STAR INDUSTRIES .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORTS), RAIGAD .....RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T A.K. SIKRI, J. The appellant (hereinafter referred to as the 'assessee') is engaged in the manufacture of Ferro-Alloys falling under Chapter 72 of Central Excise Tariff. One of the inputs for manufacture of Ferro-Alloys is Roasted Molybdenum Ore/Concentrate. The assessee has been regularly importing the aforesaid material i.e. Roasted Molybdenum Ore/Concentrate (herein…

M/S Star Industries vs. Commissioner of Customs(Imports) Raigad

C.A. No.-006088-006088 - 2013Supreme Court07 Oct 2015
Section 108Section 110Section 111Section 3(1)

…Page 1 JUDGMENT REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6088 OF 2013 M/S STAR INDUSTRIES .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORTS), RAIGAD .....RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T A.K. SIKRI, J. The appellant (hereinafter referred to as the 'assessee') is engaged in the manufacture of Ferro-Alloys falling under Chapter 72 of Central Excise Tariff. One of the inputs for manufacture of Ferro-Alloys is Roasted Molybdenum Ore/Concentrate. The assessee has been regularly importing the aforesaid material i.e. Roasted Molybdenum Ore/Concentrate (herein…

M/S Ivrcl. Infrastructure & Projects Ltd vs. Commnr. of Customs, Chennai

The appeal is dismissed with

C.A. No.-005282-005282 - 2004Supreme Court15 Apr 2015
Section 25(1)

…Page 1 JUDGMENT REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5282 OF 2004 M/S. IVRCL INFRASTRUCTURE & PROJECTS LTD. …APPELLANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI ...RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T R.F. Nariman, J. 1. The facts necessary to decide this appeal are as follows. The appellant entered into a Joint Venture Agreement with M/s Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Limited for the purpose of construction of roads in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The Joint Venture was awarded a contract by the National Highways Aut…

M/S Ivrcl. Infrastructure & Projects Ltd vs. Commnr. of Customs, Chennai

The appeal is dismissed with

C.A. No.-005282-005282 - 2004Supreme Court15 Apr 2015
Section 25(1)

…Page 1 JUDGMENT REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5282 OF 2004 M/S. IVRCL INFRASTRUCTURE & PROJECTS LTD. …APPELLANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI ...RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T R.F. Nariman, J. 1. The facts necessary to decide this appeal are as follows. The appellant entered into a Joint Venture Agreement with M/s Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Limited for the purpose of construction of roads in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The Joint Venture was awarded a contract by the National Highways Aut…

Commssioner of Income Tax Delhi-Xvi vs. S.S. Ahluwalia

ITA - 255 / 2002HC Delhi14 Mar 2014
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…a 1 (FB) wherein it has been held that jurisdictional defect or procedural irregularity was open to correction by the appellate court, where it had occasioned failure of justice or had resulted in prejudice. 43. In P. Dasa Muni Reddy v. P. AppaRao(1974) 2 SCC 725, the appellant before the Supreme Court, had filed eviction petition before the Rent Controller for eviction which was dismissed, but subsequently the landlord filed a suit for ejectment propounding that the building was constructed after 26th August, 1957 and therefore, the rent control legislation did not apply. The Supreme Court reversed…

Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. S.S. Ahluwalia

ITA/255/2002HC Delhi14 Mar 2014
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…a 1 (FB) wherein it has been held that jurisdictional defect or procedural irregularity was open to correction by the appellate court, where it had occasioned failure of justice or had resulted in prejudice. 43. In P. Dasa Muni Reddy v. P. AppaRao(1974) 2 SCC 725, the appellant before the Supreme Court, had filed eviction petition before the Rent Controller for eviction which was dismissed, but subsequently the landlord filed a suit for ejectment propounding that the building was constructed after 26th August, 1957 and therefore, the rent control legislation did not apply. The Supreme Court reversed…

Commissioner of Income Tax - Xv vs. Bharti Mishra

ITA - 567 / 2013HC Delhi18 Dec 2013
Section 54Section 54F

…ITA No. 567/2013 Page 1 of 13 $~1. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 567/2013 Date of decision: 18th December, 2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - XV ..... Appellant Through Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus BHARTI MISHRA ..... Respondent Through Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J. (ORAL): Learned counsel for the appel…

Moti Ram v. Param Dev (2 SCC 725) — Cited in 18 Judgments | BharatTax