R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission

Q: How many judgments cite R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission?

33 judgments on BharatTax cite R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (176 ITR 169), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Q: Which sections of the Income Tax Act does R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 68, Section 133(6), Section 142(1), Section 143(2), Section 144B.

176 ITR 169Supreme Court of India1989#3552 most cited

What is R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission authority for?

An order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is void and a nullity.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad · Settlement Commission · 176 ITR 169 · SC · violation of natural justice · void order · nullity · principles of natural justice

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68 Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144B Section 1961 Section 131

Issues it is cited on

section 23a retention money section 145(1)section 211 section 115baa section 28(iv)section 145(2)project completion method section 43c section 35d percentage completion method principal officer

Judgments citing R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission

Nisa Industrial Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT- WD -10(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3171/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, DR

Section 131Section 133Section 133ASection 143Section 143(2)

…statement etc. will be rendered unreliable and additions made on the basis of such material/statement etc. shall be rendered illegal. Reference in this regard can be made from the decisions made in the following judiciary ruling: - • R.B. ShreeramDurga Prasad 176 ITR 169 (SC), • KishanChandChellaram Vs. C.I.T. (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC) • Jindal Vegetable (order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in ITA no. 428 of 2007, 174 Taxmann 440 (Raj.) • LaxmanBhai Patel (order of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dated 22.07.2008 in ITR no. 41/1997). 20. Shri Pravin Kumar Agarwal was never a DIRECTOR as well as SHAREHOLDER of lender compa…

M/S. Jindal Dyechem Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5413/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaand. Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Jindal Dyechem Vs. Dcit Industries Pvt. Ltd. 110, Circle – 4 (1) Babar Road, New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacj0719Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…re will still be positive income and no addition can be made. Relying on various decisions he submitted that the department cannot direct the assessee as to how to conduct its business. He also relied upon various decisions especially decisions reported in 1. 176 ITR 169 2. 358 ITR 295 3. 73 ITD 125 4. 230 CTR 601 5. 254 ITR 377 6. 280 RR 1 7. 371 ITR 118 8. 184 taxmann.com 352 7. The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the AO, TPO and DRP. He submitted that the date of fixing cannot be taken as the date of transfer of right in the property. Only the date on which the property is transferred…

Ratanlal C. Bafna, Jalgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 110/PUN/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jul 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.109 & 110/Pun/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05 Shri Ratanlal C. Bafna, Proprietor Of R.C. Bafna Silver Palace, 96, Subhash Chowk, Jalgaon, Pin-425 001, Pan : Aampb 3939K .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas Mundhe

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)(b)

…not supplied. The Ld. AR on this issue relied on the following decisions: A.Ys.2003-04 & 2004-05 i) State of Kerala Vs. K.T. Shaduli Yusuff reported in 1977 (SC-2)- GJX-0054-SC ii) R.B Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatechand Nursing Das Vs. Settlement Commission, 176 ITR 169 (SC) 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR made reference to the order of Assessing Officer wherein it is mentioned on record that “the assessee was informed about reasons as well as details of the permission given by the JCIT, Range-1, Jalgaon as per letter dated 28.09.2010. The assesee vide his letter dated 11.10.2010 requested for supply of copy of lette…

Ratanlal C. Bafna, Jalgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 109/PUN/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas Mundhe

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)(b)

M/S Radic Khaitan Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4355/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.N. Chary[Assessment Year: 2005-06]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 153ASection 245Section 245D(4)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘F’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI K.N. CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2005-06] M/s Radico Khaitan Ltd Vs. The D.C.I.T Plot No. J-1, Block B-1 Central Circle - 19 Mohan Corporate Industrial Area, New Delhi Mathura Road, New Delhi PAN No. AAACA 2513 K [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 03.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 11.04.2019 Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Gaurav Jain, Adv Ms. Manisha Sharma, Adv Revenue by : Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR) ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, Wit…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Kartik Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result, the Revenue’s Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1682/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, Adv. & Sh. R.KFor Respondent: Smt. Puja Jindal, CIT(DR)Smt. Rano

Section 132Section 153Section 153C

…f being heard to the assessee, is bad in law and liable to be set aside - CIT vs. Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd : 26 ITR 775 (SC), Mohinder Singh Gill vs. Chief Election Commissioner : AIR 1978 SC 851, R.B. ShreeramDurga Prasad vs. Settlement Commission : 176 ITR 169 (SC), Tin Box Company vs. CIT : 249 ITR 216 (SC), J.T. (India) Exports vs. UOI : 262 ITR 269 (Del) (FB), CIT vs. GangaramChapolia& Co.: 187 ITR 594 (Ori.) 4.3.4 In view of the submissions of the appellant made on 27.02.2015 and 16.03.2015 the Lnd. CIT(A)-24, New Delhi vide his letter F.No.CIT(A)-24/Remand Report/2015- 16/69 dt. 08.05.2015…

Ritu Kamal Singhal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3017/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodiaassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punamiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Soni, DR

Section 132Section 133(6)

…as confirmed up to the stage of Hon'ble High Court. However, on further appeal, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that without allowing cross-examination to the assessee addition Cannot be made. Similar judgments are as under:- • R.B. Shreeram Durga Prasad 176 ITR 169 (SC), • Jindal Vegetable (order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in ITA no. 428 of 2007, 174 Taxmann 440 (Raj.) * Laxman Bhai Patel (order of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dated 22.07.200S in ITR no. 41/1997). Third Party i.e. Shri Bhanwarlal Jain was never a DIRECTOR as well as SHAREHOLDER of M/s. Tanika Commodities Pvt. Ltd. who had advanced loan to…

ACIT-16(1), Mumbai vs. Golden Line Studio Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 6146/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 68

…by Settlement Commission cannot be looked 7 M/s. Golden Line Studio Pvt. Ltd. into by High Court. The Ld A.R also placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of R.B.Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatehchand Nursing Das (1989)(176 ITR 169)(SC). Accordingly the Ld A.R submitted that the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Major Metals (supra) cannot be taken support of. Accordingly, the Ld A.R submitted that there is no reason to interfere with the decision rendered by Ld CIT(A). 8. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record. We notice that th…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Land Mark Dilsay P Ltd, Jaipur

Appeals are dismissed in limine but without any order as to costs

ITA 178/JPR/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(1)Section 148

…y of the persons namely, Sh. S K Jain or Sh. V K Jain or Sh. Assem Kumar Gupta or Sh. Rajesh Agrawal whose statements have referred/relied in the assessment order. Reference in this regard can be made to the decisions in the case of R.B. Shreeram Durga Prasad 176 ITR 169 (SC), 125 ITR 713 (SC), Jindal Vegetable (order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in ITA no. 428 of 2007, 174 Taxmann 440 (Raj.) and Laxman Bhai Patel (order of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dated 22/07/2008 in ITR no. 41/1997). Admittedly, these statements were not recorded by the AO but were recorded by the Investigation Wing Delhi at the back of the a…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Land Mark Dilsay P Ltd, Jaipur

Appeals are dismissed in limine but without any order as to costs

ITA 177/JPR/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(1)Section 148

…of the persons namely, Sh. S K Jain or Sh. V K Jain or Sh. Assem Kumar Gupta or Sh. Rajesh Agrawal whose statements have referred / relied in the assessment order. Reference in this regard can be made to the decisions in the case of R.B. Shreeram Durga Prasad 176 ITR 169 (SC), 125 ITR 713 (SC), Jindal Vegetable (order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in ITA no. 428 of 2007, 174 Taxmann 440 (Raj.) and Laxman Bhai Patel (order of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dated 22/07/2008 in ITR no. 41/1997). ITA 177/JP/2015 & C.O. 17/JP/2015_ 6 ITO Vs M/s Land Mark Dealers (P) Ltd. Admittedly, these statements were not recorded by th…

Prl Commr of Income Tax, Rjy, E.G.Dist vs. M/S Kadakatla Rice Mill, Tadepalligudem, W.G.Dist

ITTA/289/2017HC Telangana06 Dec 2017

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

M/S. Meditronics India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6251/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahui. T. Appeal No. 6251/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-2005. M/S. Meditronics India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 41, Pocket–Ii, Jasola, Vs. Ward : 6 (3), D E L H I – 110 025. New Delhi. Pan : Aadcm 3622 Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri Gudrun Nehra, Sr. D. R

Section 147

…videntiary value and has to be excluded :- 14 I. T. Appeal No. 6251/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-2005. Kishnichand Chellarain Vs. CIT i. reported in 125 ITR 713 R.B. Shreeram Durga Prasad & Fatehchand ii. Nursing Das Vs. Settlement Commission reported in 176 ITR 169 at page 174. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ashwani Gupta iii. 322 ITR 396 (Del); J.T. (India) Exports Vs. Union of India iv. 262 ITR 269 (Del) (FB) CIT vs Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. v. 295 ITR 105(Del) CIT Vs Pradeep Kumar Gupta vi. 207 CTR 115. ” 3.1 The ld. AR also referred page Nos. 15 to 22, 37 and 38, 40 to 66, 103 to 146 of the paper…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S D.K.B. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1722/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi CAFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Gupta, Senior DR

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…g which the said material/statement etc. will be rendered on unreliable and additions made on the basis of such material/statement etc. shall be rendered illegal. Reference in this regard can be made to the decisions in the case of R. B. Shreeram Durga Prasad 176 ITR 169 (SC), 125 ITR 713 (SC), Jindal Vegetable (order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in ITA no. 428 of 2007, 174 Taxmann 440 (Raj.) and Laxman Bhai Patel (order of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dated 22.07.2008 in ITR no. 41/1997). 4.3.5. Further, in the case of N.P. Garodia (order dated 13.01.2009 of Hon'ble P & H High Court in ITA no. 808 of 2008) and in…