How many judgments cite Rajinder Nath v. CIT?

56 judgments on BharatTax cite Rajinder Nath v. CIT (120 ITR 14), spanning 2009 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Rajinder Nath v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 10(38), Section 132, Section 142(1), Section 143(2).

Rajinder Nath v. CIT

120 ITR 14Supreme Court of India1979#2068 most cited

What is Rajinder Nath v. CIT authority for?

A 'direction' issued by an appellate or revisional authority under Sections 150(1) or 153(3) of the Income-tax Act must be a specific, clear, and mandatory positive command requiring action, and not merely an observation or finding, to be legally effective.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Rajinder Nath v CIT · Section 150(1) direction · Section 153(3) direction · reassessment limitation · express direction · specific mandatory command · mere observation · finding · appellate authority direction

Also reported as

2 Taxmann 204

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 10(38)Section 132 Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 149

Issues it is cited on

section 150(2)section 150(1)section 150 section 153(3)section 33(4)section 34(1)section 31 section 33 preponderance of probability section 34 bogus long term capital gain section 245

Judgments citing Rajinder Nath v. CIT

A.C..I.T. CIRCLE-41(4)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI AWADHNARAYAN LAXMINARAYAN SINGH, MUMBAI

ITA 6227/MUM/2025[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan,(Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 150(1)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.6226/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2003-04) & ITA No.6227/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2003-04) Assistant Commissioner of v/s. Shri Awadhnarayan Income Tax,Circle – 41(4)(1) बनाम Laxminarayan Singh Room No. 852, 8th Floor, G Block, Kautilya Bhavan, BKC, Bandra (East), Mumbai 400051, Maharashtra 204, Awadh House, Thakur Laxmi Singh Estate, S.V. Road, Goregaon(West), Mumbai 400 062, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAGPS0470C Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Assessee…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. TRILOK DEWAN, SIKAR

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

ITA 303/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

….\n\n2.5.v.\nThe legal concept of a \"direction\" under Section 150(1) requires that the\nappellate or revisional authority explicitly directs reassessment of a particular\nincome or issue. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajinder Nath v.\nCIT [(1979) 120 ITR 14 (SC)] (CLC 50-54), mere observations or findings do\nnot amount to a \"direction\" unless they are specific, clear, and mandatory in\nnature. The Court stated:\n\n“A direction by a statutory authority is a positive command which requires\nsome action to be taken in accordance with it. A mere observation or\nfinding recorded without any specific di…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VAIBHAV BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 301/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

…the Act. 2.5.v. The legal concept of a "direction" under Section 150(1) requires that the appellate or revisional authority explicitly directs reassessment of a particular income or issue. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajinder Nath v. CIT [(1979) 120 ITR 14 (SC)] (CLC 50-54), mere observations or findings do not amount to a "direction" unless they are specific, clear, and mandatory in nature. The Court stated: “A direction by a statutory authority is a positive command which requires some action to be taken in accordance with it. A mere observation or finding recorded without any specific direction d…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUBHASH CHANDRA BANKA, JAIPUR

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

ITA 294/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

…e Act.\n2.5.v. The legal concept of a "direction" under Section 150(1) requires that the\nappellate or revisional authority explicitly directs reassessment of a particular\nincome or issue. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajinder Nath v.\nCIT [(1979) 120 ITR 14 (SC)] (CLC 50-54), mere observations or findings do\nnot amount to a "direction" unless they are specific, clear, and mandatory in\nnature. The Court stated:\n“A direction by a statutory authority is a positive command which requires\nsome action to be taken in accordance with it. A mere observation or\nfinding recorded without any specific direct…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIPUL BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 291/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

JAIPRAKASH L. SINGH,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 31(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands\nallowed

ITA 1301/MUM/2024[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2003-04

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n“F” BENCH MUMBAI\nBEFORE HON'BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER &\nSHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA No. 1301/Mum/2024\n(Assessment Year: 2003-04)\nJaiprakash L. Singh\nVs. ITO 31(2)(1)\nKhwaish, Laxmi Singh\n615, 6th Floor, Kautilya\nEstate, S.V. Road,\nBhavan, BKC\nGoregoan (W) – 400062\nPAN/GIR No. AACPS4994F\n(Applicant)\n(Respondent)\nAssessee by Shri Vimal Punamiya\nRevenue by Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT Ld.DR\nDate of Hearing\n14.01.2025\nDate of Pronouncement\n25.02.2025\nआदेश / ORDER\nPER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:\nThe present appeal has been f…

S.P. SINGLA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 514/CHANDI/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Jan 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT-DR

Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153Section 153A

…rectly involved in the disposal of the case. To be a direction as contemplated by Section 153(3)(ii) it must be an express direction necessary for the disposal of the case before the authority or court vide Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 12 CTR (SC) 201 : (1979) 120 ITR 14 (SC); Gupta Traders v. CIT [1982] 28 CTR (All) 270 : (1982) 135 ITR 504 (All); CIT v. Tarajan Tea Co. (P.) Ltd. [1999] 152 CTR (SC) 1 : (1999) 236 ITR 477 (SC) and CIT v. Goel Bros. [1982] 28 CTR (All) 274 : (1982) 135 ITR 511 (All), etc. The case of an expatriate employee was to be decided on the basis of the provisions of article XIV of the trea…

SRI.PARAYARUKANDY VETTATH GANGADHARAN,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), CALICUT

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 158/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar C., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 150

…ate court, i.e., by the Tribunal vide it’s order dated 30.08.2013 (ITA Nos. 352 & 353/Coch/2013) in the case of KTC, i.e., in view of the restricted meaning of the said term as explained in Murlidhar Bhagwandas (supra), followed by Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 14 (SC). The same is clearly so, with, rather, there being instances of Hon’ble Courts, with a view to restore justice, suo motu directing assessment of income in the hands of the other, intimately connected person. The extended time limit, i.e., w.r.t. s. 153(3)(ii) r/w s. 150, shall accordingly apply. The assessee’s challenge before us, while not p…

SRI.PARAYARUKANDY VETTATH GANGADHARAN,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), CALICUT

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 156/COCH/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar C., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 150

SRI.PARAYARUKANDY VETTATH GANGADHARAN,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), CALICUT

In the result, the instant appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 157/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasparayarukandy Vettath Gangadharan Dy. Cit, Circle - 1(1) Kerala Transport Company (Decd., Calicut Vs. Represented By Lrs.) K.T.C. Building, Ymca Calicut 673001 [Pan: Adhpg8318B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar C., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 150(1)Section 153Section 2(22)(e)Section 268A

THE KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD.,KOLLAM vs. THE DICT, KOLLAM

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 96/COCH/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Mar 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasthe Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Sankaramangalam Circle - 1, Kollam Chavara, Kollam 691001 Vs. [Pan:Aaact8118R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev R., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 154Section 244A

…incidentally find that the income belonged to another year, but that was not a finding necessary for the disposal of an appeal in respect of the year of assessment in question.’ (emphasis, supplied) This stands reiterated by it in Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 14 (SC). 5.4 Now, this is precisely what transpires in the instant case; the Hon’ble Court finding as a fact that the approval and, thus, crystallization of the liability being claimed did not, even as contended by the Revenue, occur in the previous year relevant to AY 2004-05. Why, the assessee disputing the disallowance for AY 2004- 05, despite the…

M/S CITI PLAZA,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 3(1), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 356/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…to reopen the case for AY 2006-07, to bring to tax the long term capital gain under dispute. 2. That while taking the above view, the ld.CIT(A) was not justified in totally ignoring the binding decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajinder Nath vs CIT (1979) 120 ITR 14 (SC), heavily relied upon by assessee, holding that 'when it is left to the option or discretion of the ITO, whether or not to take an action, it cannot be described as direction". Various other binding judicial decisions relied upon by assessee, but not considered by the ld.CIT(A), also render his order as unsustainable. 3. That having held so,…

SH. JOGINDER SINGH S/O. SH. GURDIAL SINGH,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BATHINDA

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 198/ASR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Kanchan Garg, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 150Section 153(3)

…h any action for assessment, reassessment or recomputation may be taken. ” 4.6.1 The provision above comes into play only if there are any findings or directions in the order. This aspect was considered in the case of Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 2 Taxman 204/120 ITR 14 (SC), the Hon'ble Apex Court has discussed the expression of "finding" and "direction" as under:- "The expressions "finding" and "direction" in section 153(3) are limited in meaning. A finding given in an appeal, revision or reference arising out of an assessment must be a finding necessary for the disposal of the particular case, that is to say,…

SRI A.M. ABDUL BASHEER RAHMAN,,RAJAPALAYAM vs. ITO, WARD-2, , VIRUDHUNAGAR

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3008/CHNY/2019[1987-88]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Nov 2022AY 1987-88

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji &For Respondent: Shri P.Sajit Kumar, (JCIT)- Ld. DR

Section 144Section 148Section 149Section 150Section 150(1)Section 153(3)(ii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “सी” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी वी. दुगा1 राव, "ाियक सद2 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ7वाल ,लेखा सद2 के सम9। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.3008/Chny/2019 (िनधा1रण वष1 / Assessment Year: 1987-88) Estate of Late A.M. Jakh Jaakh The Income Tax Officer (Represented by Shri Mr. A.M. Basheer Ward-2, बनाम/ Rahman) Virudhunagar. Vs. 200, Seethakathi Street, Madurai (TN) Rajapalayam-626 117. !थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AJFPJ-0549-A (अपीलाथ./Appellant) : (/0थ. / Respondent) अ…

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL vs. PANYAM CEMENT & MINERAL INDUSTRIS LIMITED , NANDYAL

In the result, both the appeals by the Revenue are partly allowed and the C

ITA 1963/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P.Vinod, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)Section 53A

…cumstances of the case the Ld.CIT(A) is correct in granting legal relief by holding that the assessment is invalid as it is done following the directions of Tribunal as per Section 150(1) as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajindernath Vs CIT 120 ITR 14. It was held by the Supreme Court that: "A finding given in an appeal, revision or reference arising out of an assessment must be a finding necessary for the disposal of the particular case, that is to say, in respect of the particular assessee and in relation to the particular assessment year. To be a necessary finding it must be directly involve…

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL vs. PANYAM CEMENTS & MINERAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED, NANDYAL

In the result, both the appeals by the Revenue are partly allowed and the C

ITA 1039/HYD/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P.Vinod, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)Section 53A

THE JOINT LESSEES OF INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,,MUMBAI vs. ITO 20 (2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the assessee appeal is allowed

ITA 2797/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Joint Lessees Of Vs. Ito – 20(2)(1), Industrial Estate, Piramal Chambers, 1St Floor, Estate Bldg Ii Floor,Lalbaug, Lalbaug Industrial Mumbai – 400012 Estate, Dr B.A. Road, Mumbai – 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaaj7202Q Appellant .. Respondent Ito – 20(2)(1) Vs. The Joint Lessees Of Piramal Chambers, Industrial Estate, Ii Floor,Lalbaug, 1St Floor, Estate Bldg Mumbai – 400012 Lalbaug Industrial Estate, Dr B.A.Road, Mumbai – 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaaj7202Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant /Respondent By Shri G.P Mehta.Ar : Respondent/Appellant By Shri T. Shankar.Dr : Date Of Hearing 11.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.05.2022 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153Section 24(1)(a)Section 50C

…the notice was issued without independent enquiry of the information or formation of belief available on record. The Ld.AR explained the facts with voluminous information in paper book and relied on the judicial decisions as under: 1. Rajinder Nath Vs. CIT, 120 ITR 14(SC) 2. CIT Vs Homi Mehta & Sons Pvt Ltd 137 ITR 213(Bom). 3. Rakesh Dutt Vs. ACIT & Ors, 311 ITR 247 (Bom). ITA No. 2797 & 3203/Mum/2016 The Joint Lessees of Industrial Estate, Mumbai. 4. Lotus Investment Ltd. V GYWagh ACIT &Ors,288 ITR 459(Bom). 5..AB Parikh V. ITO 203 ITR 186 (Guj.) 14. We considering the facts, information and interpretation o…

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TALLY INDIA PVT LTD

In the result, we do not find

ITA/307/2018HC Karnataka06 Apr 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

Section 143(2)Section 153(1)(a)Section 153(3)(ii)Section 260Section 260ASection 92C

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL I.T.A. NO.307 OF 2018 BETWEEN: 1. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-7 BMTC COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE. 2. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-12(4), BANGALORE. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. T.N.C. SRIDHAR, ADV., FOR SRI. JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADV.,) AND: M/S. TALLY INDIA PVT. LTD NO.331-336, RAHEJA ARCADE 3RD FLOOR, KORMANGALA BENGALURU-560095. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PERCY PARDIWALLA, SR. COUNSEL A/W MS. MAN…

NANDLAL L. KODNANEY,MUMBAI vs. ITO 26(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 4924/MUM/2014[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2020AY 1992-93

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Vikas Awasthy

For Appellant: Shri Mayur A. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik (Sr. DR)

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)

…ct) on one of the heirs of the Late Rangalal Jajodia. The words ‘finding and direction’ have found clear enunciation by the Apex Court in ITO v. Nandlal L. Kondnaney v. ITO, Mumbai Muralidhar Bhagavandas [1964] 52 ITR 335 (SC) and Rajendranath v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 14 (SC), both relied upon in Krishna Devi (Lt.) (supra). The Andhra Pradesh High Court in Mohammadi Begum & Anr. v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 662 (AP) dealt with a case where the assessments were set aside u/s. 264, directing the ITO to make fresh assessments in accordance with law inasmuch as the income of the assessee’s minor children, by reason of their…

R.AJITH ,MYSORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), MYSORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 966/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjeeth Singh, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…eaning of the word direction as contemplated even in the amended provisions of law. The direction should be clear and without any ambiguity. The word 'direction' has been interpreted by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 14/2 Taxman 204, where it has been held that in any event whatever else it may amount to, on its very terms the observation that the ITO is free to take action, to assess the excess in the hand of the co-owners cannot be described as a direction. A direction by a statutory authority is in the nature of an order requiring positive compliance. When it…

Showing 1–20 of 56 · Page 1 of 3