Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen

56 ITR 198Supreme Court of India1965#384 most cited

What is Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen authority for?

The Supreme Court holds that circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) are binding on all officers and persons employed in the execution of the Income-tax Act. These circulars are binding even if they deviate from the provisions of the Act, particularly when issued to relieve hardships.

230

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 1999 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen · CBDT circulars binding · instructions binding on tax authorities · Section 119 Income Tax Act · circulars deviate from Act · relief hardship instructions · income-tax officers bound by circulars · assessment procedure · 56 ITR 198 · Central Board of Direct Taxes · binding nature of circulars · power to issue instructions

Also reported as

1 SCR 909

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 131(1A)Section 153ASection 132ASection 269SSSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

Issues it is cited on

section 5(8)closely held companyprincipal director general of income-taxaccumulated profitssection 292bsection 292bbsection 260section 260asection 282section 292section 119section 29

Judgments citing Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen

ACIT, CC-14, Delhi vs. Rama Pashu Aahar Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as indicated above and

ITA 1862/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18 Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd., Versus Acit, Central Circle 14, C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South New Delhi. Extension, Part-1, New Delhi Pan: Aaccr1144B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle 14, Versus Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd., New Delhi. C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…n accordance with the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) and they depart or deviate from such construction. It is now well settled as a result of two decisions of this Court, one in Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen [AIR 1965 SC 1375 : (1965) 1 SCR 909 : 56 ITR 198] and the other in Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT[(1979) 4 SCC 565] that circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes under Section 119 of the Act are binding on all officers and persons employed in the execution of the Act even if they deviate from the provisions of the Act. The question which arose in Navnitlal C. Javeri case [AIR 1965 SC 13…

Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd., Bulandshahr vs. ACIT, CC-14, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as indicated above and

ITA 1456/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18 Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd., Versus Acit, Central Circle 14, C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South New Delhi. Extension, Part-1, New Delhi Pan: Aaccr1144B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle 14, Versus Rama Pashu Aahar (P) Ltd., New Delhi. C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…n accordance with the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) and they depart or deviate from such construction. It is now well settled as a result of two decisions of this Court, one in Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen [AIR 1965 SC 1375 : (1965) 1 SCR 909 : 56 ITR 198] and the other in Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT[(1979) 4 SCC 565] that circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes under Section 119 of the Act are binding on all officers and persons employed in the execution of the Act even if they deviate from the provisions of the Act. The question which arose in Navnitlal C. Javeri case [AIR 1965 SC 13…

Teleperformance Global Services Pvt Ltd (M/S Serco Bpo Pvt. Ltd )., Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly 15. In result the appeal of both AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 is allowed

ITA 2815/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…n accordance with the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) and they depart or deviate from such construction. It is now well settled as a result of two decisions of this Court, one in Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen [AIR 1965 SC 1375 : (1965) 1 SCR 909 : 56 ITR 198] and the other in Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT[(1979) 4 SCC 565] that circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes 6 ITAs 2814 & 2815/Mum/2022 Teleperformance Global Service s Pvt Ltd under Section 119 of the Act are binding on all officers and persons employed in the execution of the Act even if they deviate from the provisions of the Act…

Teleperformance Global Services Pvt Ltd (M/S Serco Bpo Pvt. Ltd )., Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly 15. In result the appeal of both AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19 is allowed

ITA 2814/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C

…n accordance with the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) and they depart or deviate from such construction. It is now well settled as a result of two decisions of this Court, one in Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen [AIR 1965 SC 1375 : (1965) 1 SCR 909 : 56 ITR 198] and the other in Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT[(1979) 4 SCC 565] that circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes 6 ITAs 2814 & 2815/Mum/2022 Teleperformance Global Service s Pvt Ltd under Section 119 of the Act are binding on all officers and persons employed in the execution of the Act even if they deviate from the provisions of the Act…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-1, New Delhi vs. Brandix Mauritius Holdings Ltd

ITA - 163 / 2023HC Delhi20 Mar 2023
Section 131Section 133

…cordance with the correct interpretation of sub-section (2) and they depart or deviate from such construction. It is now well settled as a result of two decisions of this Court, one in Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen [AIR 1965 SC 1375 : (1965) 1 SCR 909 : 56 ITR 198] and the other in Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [(1979) 4 SCC 565] that circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes under Section 119 of the Act are binding on all officers and persons employed in the execution of the Act even if they deviate from the provisions of the Act. The question which arose in Navnitlal C. Javeri case [AIR 1965…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C) -II vs. M. K. Foundation

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue

ITA/147/2009HC Calcutta09 Feb 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 9Th February, 2023 Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. …For The Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. …For The Respondent. The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’ For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30Th September, 2008 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) In It(Ss)A No.68/Kol/2006 For The Block Period From 01.04.1990 To 24.08.2000. The Appeal Was Admitted On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law: (A) Whether In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Tribunal Was Justified In Law To Cancel

Section 2(22)(e)Section 260ASection 263

…4 and in view of the specific methodology of calculating deemed dividend at the time of advancing the loan by the company to the assessee, reference was made to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Navnit Lal C. Javeri vs. K. K. Sen reported in (1965) 56 ITR 198 (SC) wherein it was held that the subsequent event of amalgamation, though with retrospective effect, is not significant. Therefore, the assessing officer concluded that the assessee’s stand of reckoning the reserve and surplus of Rs.22,13,220/- for the purpose of deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act is acceptable and no adverse…

Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

ITA 1970/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/
Section 132(1)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. CIT, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18th floor, 10, 9th floor, Old CGO Building, Camac Street, Vs. MK Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACE 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 JCIT, Central Circle-1(4), M/s Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9th Floor, Old CGO Vs. Industry House, 18th floo…

Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

ITA 1020/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/
Section 132(1)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. CIT, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18th floor, 10, 9th floor, Old CGO Building, Camac Street, Vs. MK Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AAACE 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 JCIT, Central Circle-1(4), M/s Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9th Floor, Old CGO Vs. Industry House, 18th floo…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle -1, Nashik vs. Mahakaleshwar Tollways Private Limited, Ujjain

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 123/IND/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Judicial Memebr & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 123/Ind/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…he principle laid down in the rulings of the Honourable Tribunal cited above. Accordingly, the same should not apply to the present facts of the Appellant and in this regard the Appellant places reliance on the following decisions: • Navnitlal C Jhaverivs CIT 56 ITR 198 [1965] (SC); • CIT vs. Puja Prints [2014] 43 taxmann.com 247 (Bombay); • ACIT vs. Norasia Lines (Malta) Ltd [2007] 107 ITO 301 (Cochin - Special Bench); • Kalyani Packaging Industry vs. UOI [2004] 96 ECC 442; and • COC vs. M/s Ratan Melting & Wire (Civil Appeal No. 4022 of 1999). 1. Prayer: 1. Considering the above, the Appellant requests your Hon…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. The Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/82/2018HC Himachal Pradesh07 Dec 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL KUKREJA

Section 145Section 36Section 43D

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA ITA Nos.82 & 83 of 2018. Reserved on : 24th November, 2022. Date of Decision : 7th December, 2022. ITA No.82 of 2018. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax …...Appellant Versus The Kangra Central Co-op Bank Ltd. …...Respondent ITA No.83 of 2018. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax …...Appellant Versus The Kangra Central Co-op Bank Ltd. …...Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Ms. Justice Sabina, Judge The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For t…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. The Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/83/2018HC Himachal Pradesh07 Dec 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHIL KUKREJA

Section 145Section 36Section 43D

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA ITA Nos.82 & 83 of 2018. Reserved on : 24th November, 2022. Date of Decision : 7th December, 2022. ITA No.82 of 2018. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax …...Appellant Versus The Kangra Central Co-op Bank Ltd. …...Respondent ITA No.83 of 2018. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax …...Appellant Versus The Kangra Central Co-op Bank Ltd. …...Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Ms. Justice Sabina, Judge The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For t…

M/S. Praxair India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in IT(TP)A No

ITA 199/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, Senior A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92C

…of Hon’ble Supreme Court had an occasion to survey the judicial precedents on the question of binding nature of the CBDT circulars. After elaborately dealing with Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgments in the cases of Navnit Lal C. Jhaveri vs. K.K. Sen, AAC (1965) 56 ITR 198 (SC) and K.P. Varghese vs. ITO & Anr. (1981) 24 CTR (SC) 358 . (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC), their Lordships concluded that the CBDT circulars inter alia can tone down the rigour of the law and such benevolent circulars are binding on the field authorities. It cannot therefore be open to a Revenue authority to disregard the CBDT circular even if it dev…

M/S Praxair India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in IT(TP)A No

ITA 3336/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, Senior A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92C

…of Hon’ble Supreme Court had an occasion to survey the judicial precedents on the question of binding nature of the CBDT circulars. After elaborately dealing with Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgments in the cases of Navnit Lal C. Jhaveri vs. K.K. Sen, AAC (1965) 56 ITR 198 (SC) and K.P. Varghese vs. ITO & Anr. (1981) 24 CTR (SC) 358 . (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC), their Lordships concluded that the CBDT circulars inter alia can tone down the rigour of the law and such benevolent circulars are binding on the field authorities. It cannot therefore be open to a Revenue authority to disregard the CBDT circular even if it dev…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority

C.A. No.-021762-021762 - 2017Supreme Court19 Oct 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

…veri”), where the court had held while interpreting the provisions of an enactment that the 30 (1970) 3 SCC 323 31 1997 (Supp 3) SCR 466; (1997) 7 SCC 17 (hereafter "GIDC case"). 32 (2009) 16 SCC 208 33 2017 SCCOnline Bom 10021 (para 10-12) 34 (1965) 1 SCR 909 (hereafter “Navnit Lal Jhaveri”) 31 executive’s understanding – in the form of circulars in the context of taxing statutes – were valuable guides to interpretation. The observations in Navnit Lal Jhaveri (supra) were relied on to submit that the circulars in that case was used to in fact soften the rigor of a newly introduced provision. Lea…

Cae Flight Training (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 520/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 520/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Cae Flight Training (India) Pvt. Ltd., Survey No. 26 & 27, The Deputy Bandaramanahalli Commissioner Of Village, Income Tax, Anneshwara Panchayat, Central Circle – 2 (2), Kasaba Hobli, Vs. Bangalore. Devanahalli Taluk, Bengaluru – 562 110. Pan: Aadcc1248A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ketan Ved, Ca : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Revenue By Cit Dr-1 Date Of Hearing : 02-08-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02-08-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Assessment Order Dated 12/04/2022 By The Ld.Dcit, Central Circle – 2(2), Bangalore On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, M/S. Cae Flight Training (India) Private Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As The "Appellant") Respectfully Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Under Section 253 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") Against The Order Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, CA
Section 253Section 92CSection 92D

…of Hon'ble Supreme Court had an occasion to survey the judicial precedents on the question of binding nature of the CBDT circulars. After elaborately dealing with Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgments in the cases of Navnit Lal C. Jhaveri vs. K.K. Sen, AAC (1965) 56 ITR 198 (SC) and K.P. Varghese vs. ITO & Anr. (1981) 24 CTR (SC) 358 : (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC), their Lordships concluded that the CBDT circulars inter alia can tone down the rigour of the law and such benevolent circulars are binding on the field authorities. It cannot therefore be open to a Revenue authority to disregard the CBDT circular even if it dev…

The Reliance Motor Company Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2160/CHNY/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jun 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Varuvooru Sreedhar, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(32)Section 44A

…ssessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). 4. The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee confirmed the action of AO by noting as under:- The decision of Supreme Court in the case of Navnith Lal C Jaweri Vs. K.K. Sen (1965) 56 ITR 198, 207-8(SC) makes the intention of the legislature clear. If the assessee's interpretation is adopted even though a person may hold 80% of voting power in the company by way of holding shares in his individual name/wife's name/HUF name/firm's name still he can escape from the provision of Sec.2(22)(e). Therefore, I am of the opinion that the shares…

Shri Ashok Dharendra, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 256/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 256/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2015-16 Shri Ashok Dharendra, Cuke D.C.I.T. 23, Shivraj Niketan Scheme, Vs. Central Circle-3, Gautam Marg, Nr Vaishali Jaipur. Nagar Circle, Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aavpd 6554 B Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Manish Agarwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri S. Najmi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2022 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 12 /04/2022 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)- 4, Jaipur Dated 01/12/2017 For The A.Y. 2015-16 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 153B(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- Made In The Assessment Completed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153B(1)(B) Solely On The Basis Of Statements Recorded During The Course Of Search Which Stood Retracted By The Assessee Through An Affidavit Filed. Thus, The Addition Made Solely On The Basis Of Such Retracted Statements Deserves To Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri S. Najmi (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153B(1)(b)Section 3

…Sanwarmal Shivkumar 171 ITR 337 has held that the officers of the Department are bound by the circulars of the board. Further in the following cases the Courts have held that circulars issued by the Board are binding: - (i) Navnit Lal C Javeri Vs. Sen (1965) 56 ITR 198 (SC) (ii) K.P. Varghese vs. ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) (iii) UCO Bank vs. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC) (iv) Union of India vs. Azadi Bachoo Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706(SC) 22. Although, ld CIT-DR has stressed on the fact that the presumption of correctness is attached to the statement recorded U/s 132(4) of the Act and even the A.O. has categorical…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Jabalpur vs. Madhya Pradesh Power Generating Co. Ltd., Jabalpur

In the result, the Revenue's appeal is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 251/JAB/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur23 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Halder, DR
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

…thorities u/s. 119 of the Act and, accordingly, the Revenue ought to have been fair enough not to have filed an appeal or, having filed it, not pressed the same, i.e., as directed vide para 7 of the Circular (Navnit Lal C. Javeri v. Appellate Asst. CIT [1956] 56 ITR 198 4 (SC)). In fact, even on an earlier occasion, Shri Bardia, the learned counsel for the assessee, relying on the decision in Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. (supra), the Bench had inquired if any SLP had been admitted against it, and if so, its status, inasmuch as dismissal of the SLP by a speaking order would imply a confirmation of the decision reli…

DCIT CC 3(1), Mumbai vs. Yogesh Jogindernath Mehra, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1003/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Ms. Ritu KishorFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat (DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144ASection 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…actual payments have been made/received. Before going further, we deem it necessary to advert the finding of the CIT(A) on record: - “6.5 The contentions of the assessee have been duly considered. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Navnitlal C Javeri (56 ITR 198) has explained the mischief which was sought to be cured by enactment of the provisions of section 2(6A)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 4 A.Y.2012-13 (the corresponding provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the income Tax Act, 1961). Similarly, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of P.K. Badiani (76 ITR 369) has explained the mischief w…

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

…Act, and such authorities and all other persons employed in the execution of this Act shall observe and follow such orders, instructions and directions of the Board”. The CBDT circulars thus bind all the field authorities. In Navnitlal Jhaveri Vs Sen [(1965) 56 ITR 198 (SC)], Ellerman Lines Ltd Vs CIT [( 1971) 82 ITR 913 (SC)] and K P Verghese Vs ITO [( 1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC)], Hon’ble Supreme Court has accepted the validity and binding nature of the beneficent Assessment Year: 2019-20 Page 28 of 36 or benevolent circulars, and recognized the taxpayer’s right to enforce these circulars, in favour of the assesse…