New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT

49 ITR 137Supreme Court of India1963#1936 most cited

What is New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The principle of res judicata or estoppel does not apply to income tax proceedings. Each assessment year's assessment is final only for that specific year and does not bind or govern assessments for subsequent years.

59

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

New Jehangir Vakil Mills · 49 ITR 137 SC · res judicata income tax · estoppel income tax · each assessment year independent · finality of assessment · binding nature previous assessment · Section 143 · Section 148 · assessment procedure

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 10(23BBA)Section 10AASection 10DSection 133(6)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(4)deduction u/s 80iasection 80iasection 80isection 263section 10section 26section 23section 80transfersection 143(1)section 148

Judgments citing New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Blend Colours Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1137/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2015-16 Blend Colours Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 1(2), Pan – Aaccb 2492 A Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Blend Colours Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaccb 2492 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sidharth Toshnival Revenue By: Shri A. Sitarama Rao Date Of Hearing: 05/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/07/2021

For Appellant: Shri Sidharth ToshnivalFor Respondent: Shri A. Sitarama Rao
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Blend Colours Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Hyderabad. Income-tax, Circle – 1(2), PAN – AACCB 2492 A Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner of Vs Blend Colours Pvt. Ltd., Income-tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. PAN – AACCB 2492 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Sidharth Toshnival Revenue by: Shri A. Sitarama Rao Date of hearing: 05/0…

DCIT (E)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Foundation, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4065/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2021AY 2011-12
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 154Section 25

…In this regard he placed reliance upon the decision of following case laws :- • ACIT Vs. CyRUS Investments (P) Ltd. (93 taxmann.com 493)(Mum Trib) • CIT Vs. Tip Top Typography (48 taxmann.com 191) (Bom High Court) • New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (49 ITR 137) 21. Per contra learned Counsel of the assessee supported the order of learned CIT(A). Learned Counsel of the assessee submitted that learned CIT(A) has given correct finding that the persons specified are not having beneficial interest as per the provisions of the Act. He further reiterated that the rental value approved by Charity Commissioner…

ACIT 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. The New Piece Goods Bazar Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenues’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6496/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2020AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik (DR)For Respondent: Sh. B.V. Jhaveri (Adv.)
Section 143(3)Section 22Section 24

…rlier year; the principle of res judicata, it being trite law, is not applicable to the proceedings under the Act, for which reference, for the sake of completeness of this order, may be made to the decisions in New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 137 (SC); M.M. Ipoh v. CIT [1968] 67 ITR 106 (SC); and Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. UoI [2006] 282 ITR 273 (SC), the facts of each of which are also telling. Tax proceedings are not in the nature of lis, and their premise, it may be appreciated, is the correct assessment of income as per law (Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (B…

DCIT, Rourkela vs. Shri Prashant Kumar Ahluwalia, Sundergarh

In the result, appeal of the department is allowed and that of the

ITA 63/CTK/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2011-2012 DCIT, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Vs. Shri Prashant Kumar Ahluwalia, DD-2, Civil Township, Rourkela. PAN/GIR No.AASPA 2953 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Shri Prashant Kumar Ahluwalia, Vs. DCIT, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela DD-2, Civil Township, Rourkela. PAN/GIR No.AASPA 2953 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sunil Mishra, Advocate Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 26 /…

ACIT, Circle- 2(2), New Delhi vs. Anant Raj Ltd., New Delhi

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5677/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 4Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5169/DEL/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s Anant Raj Limited, v. ACIT, E-2, ARA Centre, Range-2, Jhandewalan Extension, Circle-2(2), New Delhi-110055 New Delhi TAN/PAN: AABCA3927B (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 5677/DEL/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 ACIT, v. M/s Anant Raj Limited, Range-2, E-2, ARA Centre, Circle-2(2), Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi New Delhi-110055 TAN/PAN: AABCA3927B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri V.K. Bindal, CA, Ms. Swee…

Anant Raj Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Range-2, Circle-2(2), New Delhi

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5169/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 4Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5169/DEL/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s Anant Raj Limited, v. ACIT, E-2, ARA Centre, Range-2, Jhandewalan Extension, Circle-2(2), New Delhi-110055 New Delhi TAN/PAN: AABCA3927B (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 5677/DEL/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 ACIT, v. M/s Anant Raj Limited, Range-2, E-2, ARA Centre, Circle-2(2), Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi New Delhi-110055 TAN/PAN: AABCA3927B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri V.K. Bindal, CA, Ms. Swee…

The Addl.CIT, Range-1, Baroda vs. Gujarat Fluorochemeicals Ltd, Baroda

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 548/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

…ot holding, proportion of income derived as dividend to investment made, had rightly held that income arising from sales of shares was assessable as business income - Held, yesfparas 7 & 8] [infavour of revenue]. 2). New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co.Ltd. Vs. CIT [49 ITR 137 (Supreme Court)] Section 28(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 10(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Business income - chargeable as - Assessment year 1945-46 - Whether extent to which a decision given bv ITO for one assessment year affects or binds a decision for another year, doctrine of res judicata or estoppels by…

Gujarat Flurochemicals Limited, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1), Baroda

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 117/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

…ot holding, proportion of income derived as dividend to investment made, had rightly held that income arising from sales of shares was assessable as business income - Held, yesfparas 7 & 8] [infavour of revenue]. 2). New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co.Ltd. Vs. CIT [49 ITR 137 (Supreme Court)] Section 28(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 10(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Business income - chargeable as - Assessment year 1945-46 - Whether extent to which a decision given bv ITO for one assessment year affects or binds a decision for another year, doctrine of res judicata or estoppels by…

Gujarat Flurochemicals Limited, Baroda vs. The Addl. CIT, Range-1, Baroda

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 116/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

…ot holding, proportion of income derived as dividend to investment made, had rightly held that income arising from sales of shares was assessable as business income - Held, yesfparas 7 & 8] [infavour of revenue]. 2). New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co.Ltd. Vs. CIT [49 ITR 137 (Supreme Court)] Section 28(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 10(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Business income - chargeable as - Assessment year 1945-46 - Whether extent to which a decision given bv ITO for one assessment year affects or binds a decision for another year, doctrine of res judicata or estoppels by…

Tha Addl. CIT, Range-1, Baroda vs. M/S. Gujarat Flurochemicals Limited., Baroda

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 106/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

…ot holding, proportion of income derived as dividend to investment made, had rightly held that income arising from sales of shares was assessable as business income - Held, yesfparas 7 & 8] [infavour of revenue]. 2). New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co.Ltd. Vs. CIT [49 ITR 137 (Supreme Court)] Section 28(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 10(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Business income - chargeable as - Assessment year 1945-46 - Whether extent to which a decision given bv ITO for one assessment year affects or binds a decision for another year, doctrine of res judicata or estoppels by…

Gujarat Fluorochemeicals Ltd, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(1)(1), Baroda

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 135/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

…ot holding, proportion of income derived as dividend to investment made, had rightly held that income arising from sales of shares was assessable as business income - Held, yesfparas 7 & 8] [infavour of revenue]. 2). New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co.Ltd. Vs. CIT [49 ITR 137 (Supreme Court)] Section 28(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 10(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Business income - chargeable as - Assessment year 1945-46 - Whether extent to which a decision given bv ITO for one assessment year affects or binds a decision for another year, doctrine of res judicata or estoppels by…

The DCIT, Circle-1(1), Baroda vs. Gujarat Flurochemicals Ltd., Baroda

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2546/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

…ot holding, proportion of income derived as dividend to investment made, had rightly held that income arising from sales of shares was assessable as business income - Held, yesfparas 7 & 8] [infavour of revenue]. 2). New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co.Ltd. Vs. CIT [49 ITR 137 (Supreme Court)] Section 28(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 10(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Business income - chargeable as - Assessment year 1945-46 - Whether extent to which a decision given bv ITO for one assessment year affects or binds a decision for another year, doctrine of res judicata or estoppels by…

Gujarat Flurochemicals Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2365/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

…ot holding, proportion of income derived as dividend to investment made, had rightly held that income arising from sales of shares was assessable as business income - Held, yesfparas 7 & 8] [infavour of revenue]. 2). New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co.Ltd. Vs. CIT [49 ITR 137 (Supreme Court)] Section 28(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 10(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Business income - chargeable as - Assessment year 1945-46 - Whether extent to which a decision given bv ITO for one assessment year affects or binds a decision for another year, doctrine of res judicata or estoppels by…

Sgdc India P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 24(2), Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 405/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.V. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…the details and the A.O. after due examination, queries raised and explained and which were accepted is not tenable as the principle of Res Judicata or estoppels does not apply - Held in New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (1963) 49 ITR 137 (SC). 10. Referring to various decisions, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that reasons u/s 148 could not be based on change of opinion and once a particular issue has been examined in the case of the assessee, it is not open for the Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings u/s 147 merely because a contrary view has bee…

Sgdc India P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 24(2), Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 403/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.V. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…the details and the A.O. after due examination, queries raised and explained and which were accepted is not tenable as the principle of Res Judicata or estoppels does not apply - Held in New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (1963) 49 ITR 137 (SC). 10. Referring to various decisions, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that reasons u/s 148 could not be based on change of opinion and once a particular issue has been examined in the case of the assessee, it is not open for the Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings u/s 147 merely because a contrary view has bee…

Asst CIT 27(2), Navi Mumbai vs. Usha J Dutta, Mumbai

ITA 7663/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. G. S. Pannu, Vp & Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7663/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Usha J. Dutia Acit 27(2) R. No. 420, 4Th Floor, 7 Arut Dhara, Joshi Lane बिधम/ Ghatkopar East, Tower No. 6, Vashi Rly Vs. Mumbai-400 077 Station Complex, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Abqpd9420J (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Rajiv Gubgotra, Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Pankaj R. Toprani & Ms. Krupa P. Toprani, Ars सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 28.01.2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 24.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sandeep Gosain: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv GubgotraFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj r. Toprani
Section 148Section 5Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SH. G. S. PANNU, VP & HON’BLE SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7663/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Usha J. Dutia ACIT 27(2) R. No. 420, 4th floor, 7 Arut Dhara, Joshi Lane बिधम/ Ghatkopar east, Tower No. 6, Vashi Rly Vs. Mumbai-400 077 Station Complex, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. ABQPD9420J (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Rajiv Gubgotra, DR प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Pankaj r. Toprani & Ms. Krupa P. Toprani, ARs सुनवाईकीतार…

M/S Sant Baba Bhag Singh Memorial Charitable Society, Jalandhar vs. D.C.I.T, Circle - 1 (Exemption), Chandigarh

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 432/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 432/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 12ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 432/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sant Baba Bhag Singh vs. Deputy C. I. T., Memorial Charitable Society, Circle-1 (Exemption) Santpur, VPO Manko, Chandigarh Distt. Jalandhar [PAN: AAETS 1800N] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.) Respondent by: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 12.12.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 27.02.2019 ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Or…

Apne Aap Women Worlwide (India) Trust, Kolkatta vs. ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 7373/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7373/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) Apne Aap Women Worldwide (India) Trust Income Tax Officer (Exemption)-1(1) बनाम/ 1, Sashitala Road, Kidderpore Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Kolkata-700 023 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aaata-8473-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Ld.Dr : Shashi Tulsiyan, Ld. Ar Assessee By सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 09/07/2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/10/2018 Date Of Pronouncement

For Respondent: Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Ld.DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…& Ors Vs CIT(SC) 67 ITR 106 Hon’ble Apex court has observed that res judicata is not applicable as each assessment year is a separate proceeding. Similar observations were made by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of New Jehangir Vakil Mills Co Ltd Vs CIT(SC) 49 ITR 137, and Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd & Anr.Vs Union of India & Ors (SC) 282 ITR 273. Further in the case of CIT Vs Seshasayee Industries Ltd (Madras) 242 ITR 691, It was held by the Hon’ble Madras High Court that the fact that if claim was questioned in earlier years does not entitle the assessee to contend that the law would not be applied during the co…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Smt Meenakshi Devi Avaru

WTA/1/2015HC Karnataka30 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 27

…1/113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.T.A.No.1/2015 C/W W.T.A.No.2/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2015, W.T.A.No.4/2015, W.T.A.No.5/2015, W.T.A.No.6/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2014, W.T.A.No.1/2014 & W.T.A.No.2/2014 W.T.A. No.1/2015 Between: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax C.R. Building, Queens Road Bangalore-560001. 2. Wealth Tax Officer Ward-7(1), Bangalore. …Appellants (By Mr. E.I. Sanmathi, Advocate) And: 1. Smt. Meenakshi De…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Smt.Kamakshi Devi

WTA/2/2014HC Karnataka30 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 27

…1/113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.T.A.No.1/2015 C/W W.T.A.No.2/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2015, W.T.A.No.4/2015, W.T.A.No.5/2015, W.T.A.No.6/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2014, W.T.A.No.1/2014 & W.T.A.No.2/2014 W.T.A. No.1/2015 Between: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax C.R. Building, Queens Road Bangalore-560001. 2. Wealth Tax Officer Ward-7(1), Bangalore. …Appellants (By Mr. E.I. Sanmathi, Advocate) And: 1. Smt. Meenakshi De…