Popat Bahiru Govardhane & Ors. v. Special

10 SCC 765Reported decision2013#11970 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 234DSection 270A

Issues it is cited on

dispute resolution panelsection 92section 144cinternational transactionfinal assessment orderprevious yeartransferopportunity of being heardpersoncompanysection 143(3)india

Judgments citing Popat Bahiru Govardhane & Ors. v. Special

Ecoenergy Insights Ltd ( Formerly Known As Chubb Alba Control Systems P.Ltd), New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2321/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaecoenergy Insights Ltd., Vs. Dcit, (Formerly Known As Chubb Alba Control Circle 4 (2), Systems P. Ltd.), New Delhi. Ground Floor, 18, Netaji Subhash Marg, Daryaganj, New Delhi – 110 002. (Pan :Aaaca0031C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Shri Parth, Advocate Shri Pratik Rath, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2025 Date Of Order : 10.11.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessees Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 25.07.2022Passed By The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Under Section 147 Read With Section 144C(13) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Ay 2018-19 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Ecoenergy Insights Ltd., vs. DCIT, (formerly known as Chubb Alba Control Circle 4 (2), Systems P. Ltd.), New Delhi. Ground Floor, 18, Netaji Subhash Marg, Daryaganj, New Delhi – 110 002. (PAN :AAACA0031C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Shri Parth, Advocate Shri Pratik Rath, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri S.K. Jadhav, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 12.08.2025 Date of Order : 10.11.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER…

Ebro India Pvt.Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-7(1), Delhi

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

…e Consumer Health 55 Care Ltd. (2020) 19 SCC 681, Vijay Narayan Thatte vs. State of Maharashtra [2009] 9 SCC 92]. Reference in this regard may be made to decision in the case of Popat Bahiru Govardhane & Ors. v. Special land Acquisition Officer & Anr. (2013) 10 SCC 765, wherein the apex Court observed as under: Emphatic reliance is placed on the decision of the apex Court in the case of Hope Textiles Ltd. v. UoI: [1994] 205 ITR 508 (SC). In that case, the assessee filed a return on the basis of which an order of assessment was made on 27.3.1974 and certain losses disclosed by the assessee were accepted. A notic…

Je Energy Ventures Private Limited, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1)(1), Gautam Budh Nagar

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

ITA 513/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 92B

…it on account of CG given. In this connection, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble apex court in the case of Popat Bahiru Govardhane and others vs Special Land Acquisition officer and J E Energy Ventures Private Limited vs. DCIT another [2013] 10 SCC 765. For the ready reference, the relevant extract is reproduced below: "The statutory provision may cause hardship or inconvenience to a particular party but the Court has no choice but to enforce it giving full effect to the same. The legal maxim "dura lex sed lex" which means "the law is hard but it is the law", stands attracted in such a situation…

Everest Organics Ltd vs. The Commissioner of I.T., Hyderabad

ITTA/9/2005HC Telangana21 Sept 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 143(1)(a)

…ull effect to the same. The legal maxim dura lex sed lex which means “the law is hard but it is the law”, stands attracted in such a situation. It has consistently been held that, “inconvenience is not” a decisive factor to be considered while 29 (2013) 10 SCC 765 59 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters interpreting a statute. “A result flowing from a statutory provision is never an evil. A court has no power to ignore that provision to relieve what it considers a distress resulting from its operation.” (See Martin Burn Ltd. v. Corpn. of Calcutta [AIR 1966 SC 529] , AIR p. 535, para 14 and Rohitash…

Neelachal I.Nigam L vs. Asst.Comnr.of I.Tax

ITA/8/2005HC Orissa17 Nov 2021

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

Section 143(1)(a)

…ull effect to the same. The legal maxim dura lex sed lex which means “the law is hard but it is the law”, stands attracted in such a situation. It has consistently been held that, “inconvenience is not” a decisive factor to be considered while 29 (2013) 10 SCC 765 59 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters interpreting a statute. “A result flowing from a statutory provision is never an evil. A court has no power to ignore that provision to relieve what it considers a distress resulting from its operation.” (See Martin Burn Ltd. v. Corpn. of Calcutta [AIR 1966 SC 529] , AIR p. 535, para 14 and Rohitash…

C. Sanyasi Raju vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle, Vizag

ITTA/7/2005HC Telangana21 Nov 2017

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

Section 143(1)(a)

…ull effect to the same. The legal maxim dura lex sed lex which means “the law is hard but it is the law”, stands attracted in such a situation. It has consistently been held that, “inconvenience is not” a decisive factor to be considered while 29 (2013) 10 SCC 765 59 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters interpreting a statute. “A result flowing from a statutory provision is never an evil. A court has no power to ignore that provision to relieve what it considers a distress resulting from its operation.” (See Martin Burn Ltd. v. Corpn. of Calcutta [AIR 1966 SC 529] , AIR p. 535, para 14 and Rohitash…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Samrakshna Electricals Ltd

ITTA/28/2010HC Telangana21 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 143(1)(a)

…ull effect to the same. The legal maxim dura lex sed lex which means “the law is hard but it is the law”, stands attracted in such a situation. It has consistently been held that, “inconvenience is not” a decisive factor to be considered while 29 (2013) 10 SCC 765 59 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters interpreting a statute. “A result flowing from a statutory provision is never an evil. A court has no power to ignore that provision to relieve what it considers a distress resulting from its operation.” (See Martin Burn Ltd. v. Corpn. of Calcutta [AIR 1966 SC 529] , AIR p. 535, para 14 and Rohitash…

M/s.GVK Petro Chemicals Private Limited, (Novo Resins AND vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/8/2005HC Telangana05 Jul 2012
Section 143(1)(a)

…ull effect to the same. The legal maxim dura lex sed lex which means “the law is hard but it is the law”, stands attracted in such a situation. It has consistently been held that, “inconvenience is not” a decisive factor to be considered while 29 (2013) 10 SCC 765 59 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters interpreting a statute. “A result flowing from a statutory provision is never an evil. A court has no power to ignore that provision to relieve what it considers a distress resulting from its operation.” (See Martin Burn Ltd. v. Corpn. of Calcutta [AIR 1966 SC 529] , AIR p. 535, para 14 and Rohitash…

Popat Bahiru Govardhane & Ors. v. Special (10 SCC 765) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax