What is R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT authority for?

Tax laws must be interpreted reasonably and in consonance with justice, even though equitable considerations are generally irrelevant in their interpretation.

How many judgments cite R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT?

131 judgments on BharatTax cite R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT (82 ITR 570), spanning 2012 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 10, Section 10(23C)(iiiad), Section 11, Section 115JAA, Section 115JB.

R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT (82 ITR 570)

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1549/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate and Shri C. Naresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT DR

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 90

…the present issue wherein more pertinent question involved is in respect of timing mismatch for the FTC paid and its claim as a credit by the assessee. AY 2013-14 11.4. In this regard, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 570 (SC) expressly observed that equitable considerations are irrelevant in interpreting tax laws but those laws like all other laws have to be interpreted reasonably and in consonance with justice. Also, Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v. Union of India [2012] 341 ITR 1 (SC) emphasized that taxing statutes must be interp…

BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT-2(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1397/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 90

…involved is in respect of timing mismatch for the FTC paid and its claim as a credit by the assessee. 21 ITA Nos.1397 and 1549/MUM/2023 Bank of India AY 2013-14 11.4. In this regard, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 570 (SC) expressly observed that equitable considerations are irrelevant in interpreting tax laws but those laws like all other laws have to be interpreted reasonably and in consonance with justice. Also, Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v. Union of India [2012] 341 ITR 1 (SC) emphasized that taxing statutes must be interp…

SARVODAYA SAMAJ KALYAN SANSTHAN,JAMUI vs. CPC , BANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 563/PAT/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

…ich basis it had been claiming exemption in the past. It is true that equitable considerations are out of place in interpreting tax laws. However, as explained in R. 10 | P a g e The Nehru Memorial Education Society v. ITO B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala vs. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 570 (SC), those laws, like all other laws, are to be interpreted reasonably and in consonance with justice. As it famously remarked in CIT vs. J. H. Gotla [1985] 156 ITR 323 (SC), that though equity and taxation are often strangers, attempts should be made that these do not remain always so, and if a construction results in equity rather than in injus…