Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 142(1), Section 143(3), Section 2(4), Section 2(5), Section 263, Section 32.

Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax

Q: How many judgments cite Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax?

64 judgments on BharatTax cite Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax (26 ITR 765), spanning 2009 to 2025.

26 ITR 765Supreme Court of India1954#1756 most cited

What is Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax authority for?

The definition of 'business' is of wide import, encompassing any trade, commerce, manufacture, or adventure in the nature of trade. Even a single and isolated transaction can constitute an 'adventure in the nature of trade' if it bears the clear indicia of trade, and no fixed formula can be evolved to determine the character of such isolated transactions.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills · Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax · 26 ITR 765 · SC 1954 · definition of business · adventure in the nature of trade · single isolated transaction · indicia of trade · Section 2(4) Income Tax Act · Section 2(5) Excess Profits Tax Act · scope of business income · trade character

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(4)Section 2(5)Section 263 Section 32 Section 1961 Section 2(13) of the Income Tax Act

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 208 section 10(2a)section 14a disallowance section 32(1)(iia)clarificatory amendment section 32(1)(ii)strategic investment section 92ca(1)section 144c(3)corporate guarantee additional depreciation section 57

Judgments citing Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax

Shri Jaiteshwar Seva Sansthan, Jodhpur vs. CIT (Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 344/JODH/2025[NA]Status: FixedITAT Jodhpur26 Jun 2025

Bench: Us By Challenging The Revisional Order.

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(4)Section 2(5)Section 263

…ccordingly the claim of depreciation was in order. Your kind attention is also invited towards the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court at Page nos. 772-773 in the case of Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills vs Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax IR 1955 SC 176, (1954) 26 ITR 765 SC, 19551 SCR 952 stated as under: "Business" as defined in section 2(5) of the Excess Profits Tax Act includes amongst others, any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture. The first part of this definition of "a business" in the Excess Profits Tax Act is the same as the definition of a busi…

Shree Ram Colloids Private Limited, Jodhpur vs. Principal CIT(1), Jodhpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 344/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeshree Ram Colloids Private Vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax (1), Jodhpur C-79, Mia, Phase-Ii, Jodhpur- 342 005 Pan: Aakcs5803L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

ACIT 17(1), Mumbai vs. Gupta C K, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 123/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Acit-17(1) Gupta C K O/O The Government Of India 21, K. T. Building, O/O The Dy. Cit Cirr 17(1), Devji Ratansey Marg, Masjid Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Room No. 117, Bunder, Mumbai-400 009 Bkc, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051

For Appellant: Shri Rajen DamaniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 250Section 50DSection 50ESection 54E

…supra). 14. Even a single and isolated transaction can be held to be capable of falling within the definition of an adventure in the nature of trade if it bears the clear indicia of trade (Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits [1954] 26 ITR 765 (SC); G. Venkataswami Naidu & Co. (supra); Saroj Kumar Mazumdar v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 242 (SC); Dalmia Cement Ltd. (supra). The fact that the transaction is not in the way of business of the assessee does not alter the character of the transaction (G. Venkataswami Naidu & Co. (supra); Saroj Kumar Mazumdar (supra); Dalmia Cement Ltd. (supra). 15. It…

DCIT- CC - 7(3), Mumbai vs. Acg Associated Capsules Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, no question of law arises

ITA 3283/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved/For Respondent: Shri Akhtar Hussain Ansari

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 92C

…wide import which would also include all such activities which coalesce into setting up of the business. See Mazagaon Dock Ltd vs CIT & Excess Profits Tax; (1958) 34 ITR 368 (SC), and Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills vs Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax; (1954) 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee‟s income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT(A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure - then it c…

DCIT CC- 7(3), Mumbai vs. Acg Associated Capsules Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, no question of law arises

ITA 3282/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved/For Respondent: Shri Akhtar Hussain Ansari

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 92C

Acg Assocation Capsules P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, no question of law arises

ITA 2384/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved/For Respondent: Shri Akhtar Hussain Ansari

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 92C

Acg Assocation Capsules P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, no question of law arises

ITA 2383/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved/For Respondent: Shri Akhtar Hussain Ansari

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 92C

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -5 vs. Jaypee Powergrid Ltd

ITA-397/2019HC Delhi30 Nov 2023

Bench: The Tribunal Was Whether The Interest Earned By The Respondent/Assessee From The Investment Made In Fixed Deposits, Out Of The Funds Received For Setting Up A Power Transmission System In The State Of Himachal Pradesh, Would Be Amenable To Tax Under The Head “Income From Other Sources”? 4. The Assessing Officer (Ao), Via The Assessment Order Dated Digitally Signed By:Atul Jain Signing Date:14.12.2023 15:33:37 Signature Not Verified

…Page 10 of 13 include all such activities which coalesce into setting up of the business. See Mazagaon Dock Ltd vs CIT & Excess Profits Tax; (1958) 34 ITR 368 (SC), and Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills vs Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax; (1954) 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee‟s income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT(A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure - then…

M/S. Kanpur Fertilizers & Cement Ltd., Noida vs. ITO, Noida

Appeal are allowed

ITA 308/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 234B

…of wide import which would also include all such activities which coalesce into setting up of the business. See Mazagaon Dock Ltd. v. CIT[Excess Profits Tax [1958] 34 ITR 368 (SC) and Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax [1954] 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee's income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to dev…

Sp Jammu Udhampur Highway Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 3(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1507/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blesp Jammu-Udhampur Highway Pvt Ltd., V. Dcit- Circle-3(3)(2) 41/44, Shapoorji Pallonji Centre Aayakar Bhavan Minoo Desai Marg Mumbai - 400020 Colaba, Mumbai – 400005 Pan: Aaocs5512N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Chulawala Department By : Smiti Samant

For Appellant: Shri Manish ChulawalaFor Respondent: Smiti Samant

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)

…ected with business. The word "business" is of wide import which would also include all such activities which coalesce into setting up of the business. See Mazagaon Dock Ltd. v. CIT & EPT [1958] 34 ITR 368 (SC), and Narain Swdeshi Weaving Mills v. CEPT [1954] 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee's income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT(A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure - then it c…

Petronet Mhb Limited, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1)(3), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 789/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.G Vinay Simha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.R Narayana, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 37(1)

…han that of the latter. The word "business" used in s. 37(1) in association with the expression "for the purposes of" is a word of wide connotation. As observed by the Supreme Court in Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax [1954] 26 ITR 765: "The word 'business' connotes some real substantial and systematic or organized course of activity or conduct with asset purpose." 8.6 In the context of a taxing statute, the word "business" would signify an organized and continuous course of commercial activity, which is carried on with the end in view of making or earning profits. Under s. 37(…

M/S Bosch Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu Circle-1, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1629/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14 Bosch Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Hosur Road, Adugodi, Of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore – 560 030. Circle 1, Pan: Aaacm 9840P Bangalore. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Advocate Respondent By : Shri V S Chakrapani, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S.2. This Appeal Is Against The Order Of The Cit(Appeals), Bangalore-9, Bangalore Dated 31.3.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013- 14. 3. The Assessee Raised Grounds Pertaining To The Following Issues:- Deduction U/S. 35(2Ab) Computed On Net Expenditure As Opposed To Gross Expenditure Disallowance Of Provision For Bad & Doubtful Debts I) Disallowance Of Provision For Long Term Service Award Disallowance Of Expenditure U/S. 14A Of The Act Ii) Page 2 Of 67

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 14ASection 35Section 37Section 43BSection 80J

…han that of the latter. The word "business" used in s. 37(1) in association with the expression "for the purposes of" is a word of wide connotation. As observed by the Supreme Court in Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax [1954] 26 ITR 765: "The word 'business' connotes some real substantial and systematic or organised course of activity or conduct with asset purpose." Page 28 of 67 8.6 In the context of a taxing statute, the word "business" would signify an organised and continuous course of commercial activity, which is carried on with the end in view of making or earning profits…

Teh DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. Metro Link Express for Gandhinagar and Ahmedabad Mega Co. Ltd, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and Cross

ITA 1754/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, &For Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…etting up of the business. We take support of these propositions from the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mazagaon Dock Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income tax and Excess Profit tax [1958] 34 ITR 368 and Narain Swadeshi Wev. Mills vs, CEPT [1954] 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee's income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT (A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure then it ca…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Rohtak Panipat Tollway Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1938/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. D.R

Section 271Section 56

…setting up of the business. We take support of these propositions from the judgments of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Mazagaon Dock Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income tax and Excess Profit tax [1958] 34 ITR 368 and Narain Swadeshi Wev. Mills v. CEPT [1954] 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee's income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT (A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure then it ca…

Pranava Electronics P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 415/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, Advocate and Ms. Girija, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshini Mishra, Addl. CIT

Section 115JSection 14Section 14ASection 234BSection 37(1)

…….’’ Page 10 of 21 II) Money lent in the ordinary course of business, claim of bad debt allowable under section 36(1)(vii) rws 36(2)(i), alternatively under section 37(1): (3) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills vs CEPT in 26 ITR 765 has held as reproduced as hereunder: ‘’9….The word "business" connotes some real, substantial and systematic or organised course of activity or conduct with a set purpose.’’ (4) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indore Malwa United Mills Ltd vs State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors in 55 ITR 736 has held as reproduced as hereunder ‘’7……….. The next…

ACIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi vs. Dlf Commercial Developers Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 9227/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80Section 80I

…tenance of the allegation that assessee earned capital gain on sale of bare shell building blocks.It is worthwhile to make reference to the concept of business as observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills v. CCE [1954] 26 ITR 765 (SC) as relied upon the Ld. Counsel for the assesee. The relevant observation is reproduced hereunder: The word "business" connotes some real, substantial and systematic or organised course of activity or conduct with a set purpose. On the others hand, a single and isolated transaction has been held to be conceivably capable of falling 140 I.T.A.…

Kumher Kriya Vikrya Sahakari Samiti Ltd., Bharatpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Bharatpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 912/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Goyal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(iv)

…unt under the IT Act for comply with the various provisions of the Act. The assessee has not invested any idle amount in the bank. 3.2 In support of its claim, the A/R of the assessee has quoted citations in the case of Narain Swadeshi Wyg Mills V CIT (1954) 26 ITR 765 (SC) and ACIT Vs. Brij Bhushan Lal & Sons on December, 1999. 3.3 I have carefully considered the reply of the assessee along with facts and surroundings of the case and found no merit in the argument of the assessee. The facts of the case laws cited by the assessee are not at all match with the facts and circumstances of the case. The assessee soc…

M/S Jaypee Powergrid Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 239/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 239/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 M/S Jaypee Powergrid Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 63, Ja House, Basant Lok, Vasant Ward-4(1), Vihar, New Delhi-110057 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcj8054F Assessee By : Sh. Vinod Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Apoorva Bhardwaj, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Sh. Vinod Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Apoorva Bhardwaj, Sr. DR

…cted with business. The word "business" is of wide import which would also include all such activities which coalesce into setting up of the business. See Mazagaon Dock Ltd. vs. CIT/CEPT (1958) 34 ITR 368 (SC) and Narain Swadeshi Weaving Mills vs. CEPT (1954) 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee's income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT(A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure then it can…

Pranava Electronics Pvt Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

ITA/147/2016HC Karnataka07 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 115JSection 14Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 260Section 260ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 37(1)

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.147 OF 2016 BETWEEN: PRANAVA ELECTRONICS PVT LTD FLAT NO.101, 1ST FLOOR, EDEN PARK NO.20, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.K.R.PRADEEP, ADV.,) AND: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-12(2) BANGALORE - 560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.E.I.SANMATHI, ADV.) - - - THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 11.09.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.415/BAN…

Road Infrastructure Development Company of Rajasthan Ltd, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

ITA 670/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P.P. Pareek (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Gupta (JCIT)

Section 14ASection 244ASection 35D

…ich would also include all such activities which coalesce into setting up of the business. M/s Road Infrastructure Dev. Com. of Rajasthan Ltd. vs. ACIT See Mazagaon Dock Ltd. v. CIT & EPT [1958] 34 ITR 368 (SC), and Narain Swdeshi Weaving Mills v. CEPT [1954] 26 ITR 765 (SC). Once it is held that the assessee's income is an income connected with business, which would be so in the present case, in view of the finding of fact by the CIT(A) that the monies which were inducted into the joint venture company by the joint venture partners were primarily infused to purchase land and to develop infrastructure - then it c…