R.Puthunainar Alhithan & Ors. v. P.H. Pandian & Ors.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. ICOMM TELE LIMITED

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: The Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court Reserved On : 11.11.2025 Pronounced On : 14.11.2025 Coram: The Honourable Mr.Justice C.V.Karthikeyan & The Honourable Mr.Justice R.Vijayakumar A.S.(Md).No.22 Of 2015 1.M.Kalaiselvi 2.K.Vijayakumar (Died) 3.K.Venkateshan ....Appellants/Plaintiffs 4.Susila ....Lrs Of 2Nd Appellant (4Th Appellant Is Brought On Record As Legal Heir Of Deceased 2Nd Appellant Vide Court Order Dated 13.10.2022) Vs 1.K.Kannaiyan (Died) 2.M.Kaaliyannan 3.A.Anandha Krishnan 4.Sulochana 5.Nagarajan 6.Muthuselvam 7.Booma Devi 8.Uma Maheswari 9.N.M.Kandhan 10.Krishnaveni 1/13 Https://Www.Mhc.Tn.Gov.In/Judis

…A.S.(MD).No.22 of 2015 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT RESERVED ON : 11.11.2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 14.11.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR A.S.(MD).No.22 of 2015 1.M.Kalaiselvi 2.K.Vijayakumar (died) 3.K.Venkateshan ....Appellants/Plaintiffs 4.Susila ....LRs of 2nd appellant (4th appellant is brought on record as legal heir of deceased 2nd appellant vide Court order dated 13.10.2022) Vs 1.K.Kannaiyan (died) 2.M.Kaaliyannan 3.A.Anandha Krishnan 4.Sulochana 5.Nagarajan 6.Muthuselvam 7.Booma Devi 8…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (IT and TP) vs. M/s. Idea Cellular Limited

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

…by the beneficiary only as per the scheme of the statute. 20. In the matter of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. and others v. Commissioner of Sales Tax and others14, their Lordships of the Supreme Court dealing with Rules 41 & 41-A of the Bombay 14 (1992) 3 SCC 624 Page 16 of 32 {W.P.(T)Nos.14/2021, 15/2021, 16/2021, 17/2021 & 18/2021} Sales Tax Rules, 1959 held that the rule-making authority can provide for a small abridgement or curtailment while extending a concession, and observed as under: - “9. … We fail to understand how a valid grievance can be made in respect of such deduction when the ve…

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE

The appeal is allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

…3.2008 did not suffer from such infirmity as would warrant interference by the High Court, by passing an order of remand. 8. It may be apposite at this juncture, to refer to the decision of this Court in Ashirvad Enterprises vs. State of Bihar, (2004) 3 SCC 624 wherein it was stated that whether immunity from prosecution and penalty should be granted in a given case, has to be decided by the Commission by exercising its discretion, in the light of the facts and circumstances of each case. There is no straight jacket formula that would universally apply in every case. Where the Commission is satisfie…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 vs. INDUSTRIAL PROMOTION AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION OF ORISSA LTD.

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

…by the beneficiary only as per the scheme of the statute. 20. In the matter of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. and others v. Commissioner of Sales Tax and others14, their Lordships of the Supreme Court dealing with Rules 41 & 41-A of the Bombay 14 (1992) 3 SCC 624 Page 16 of 32 {W.P.(T)Nos.14/2021, 15/2021, 16/2021, 17/2021 & 18/2021} Sales Tax Rules, 1959 held that the rule-making authority can provide for a small abridgement or curtailment while extending a concession, and observed as under: - “9. … We fail to understand how a valid grievance can be made in respect of such deduction when the ve…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. NAMITA CHHABRA

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SAMEER JAIN

…by the beneficiary only as per the scheme of the statute. 20. In the matter of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. and others v. Commissioner of Sales Tax and others14, their Lordships of the Supreme Court dealing with Rules 41 & 41-A of the Bombay 14 (1992) 3 SCC 624 Page 16 of 32 {W.P.(T)Nos.14/2021, 15/2021, 16/2021, 17/2021 & 18/2021} Sales Tax Rules, 1959 held that the rule-making authority can provide for a small abridgement or curtailment while extending a concession, and observed as under: - “9. … We fail to understand how a valid grievance can be made in respect of such deduction when the ve…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. NAMITA CHHABRA

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SAMEER JAIN

…by the beneficiary only as per the scheme of the statute. 20. In the matter of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. and others v. Commissioner of Sales Tax and others14, their Lordships of the Supreme Court dealing with Rules 41 & 41-A of the Bombay 14 (1992) 3 SCC 624 Page 16 of 32 {W.P.(T)Nos.14/2021, 15/2021, 16/2021, 17/2021 & 18/2021} Sales Tax Rules, 1959 held that the rule-making authority can provide for a small abridgement or curtailment while extending a concession, and observed as under: - “9. … We fail to understand how a valid grievance can be made in respect of such deduction when the ve…

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SAMARPAN SYNTHETICS PVT LTD

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,REKHA BORANA

…by the beneficiary only as per the scheme of the statute. 20. In the matter of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. and others v. Commissioner of Sales Tax and others14, their Lordships of the Supreme Court dealing with Rules 41 & 41-A of the Bombay 14 (1992) 3 SCC 624 Page 16 of 32 {W.P.(T)Nos.14/2021, 15/2021, 16/2021, 17/2021 & 18/2021} Sales Tax Rules, 1959 held that the rule-making authority can provide for a small abridgement or curtailment while extending a concession, and observed as under: - “9. … We fail to understand how a valid grievance can be made in respect of such deduction when the ve…

Suchirindia Infratech Pvt. Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

…by the beneficiary only as per the scheme of the statute. 20. In the matter of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. and others v. Commissioner of Sales Tax and others14, their Lordships of the Supreme Court dealing with Rules 41 & 41-A of the Bombay 14 (1992) 3 SCC 624 Page 16 of 32 {W.P.(T)Nos.14/2021, 15/2021, 16/2021, 17/2021 & 18/2021} Sales Tax Rules, 1959 held that the rule-making authority can provide for a small abridgement or curtailment while extending a concession, and observed as under: - “9. … We fail to understand how a valid grievance can be made in respect of such deduction when the ve…

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. M/s. Nava Bharat Ferro Alloys Ltd.,

…e between the parties and thus it could not have been inferred that Harminder Koghar did not require the suit property bonafidely since he was negotiating sale of the property. Supreme Court in R.Puthunainar Alhithan & Ors. Vs. P.H. Pandian & Ors. (1996) 3 SCC 624 laid down the distinction between a fact said to be proved, disproved and not proved as under: “8. An inference from the proved facts must be so probable that if the court believes, from the proved facts, that the facts do exist, it must be held that the fact has been proved. The inference of proof of that fact could be drawn from the given…