Rishabh Agro Industries Ltd. v. P.N.B. Capital Services Ltd.

5 SCC 515Reported decision2000#8486 most cited

What is Rishabh Agro Industries Ltd. v. P.N.B. Capital Services Ltd. authority for?

Courts interpret the law as it stands and cannot legislate. If a law is misused or subject to abuse, it is for the legislature to amend it, not the judiciary to supply a casus omissus.

13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Rishabh Agro Industries Ltd. v. P.N.B. Capital Services Ltd. · casus omissus · judicial interpretation · legislative intent · abuse of process · court cannot legislate · amend law

Judgments citing Rishabh Agro Industries Ltd. v. P.N.B. Capital Services Ltd.

Shree Cement Limited, Bangur Nagar vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee - appellant in ITA No

ITA 1517/JPR/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dilip B. Desai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 254Section 36(1)(va)Section 80Section 801A

…ts the law and cannot legislate it. If a provision of law is misused and subjected to the abuse of process of law, it is for the Legislature to amend, modify or repeal it,if deemed necessary - Rishab Agro Industries Ltd. v. P.N.B. Capital Services Ltd. [2000] 5 SCC 515. The legislative casus omissus cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative process 13.8 He also serviced the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Smt. Tarulata Shyam -vs.- CIT (1977) 108 ITR 345 (SC) wherein it has been held that: “It is urged that the principle in the last limb of sub-section (1) of section 108 of the Commonwealth Act should als…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyd vs. M/S. Sushee Infra Pvt. Ltd, Hyd

ITTA/456/2016HC Telangana21 Apr 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Vinubhai Mohanlal Dobaria vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms

C.A. No.-001977-001977 - 2025Supreme Court07 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

Section 143(1)Section 276C

…and cannot legislate it. If a provision of law is misused and subjected to the abuse of process of law, it is for the legislature to amend, modify or repeal it, if deemed necessary. (See Rishabh Agro Industries Ltd. v. P.N.B. Capital Services Ltd. [(2000) 5 SCC 515] ) The legislative casus omissus cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative process. 16. Two principles of construction — one relating to casus omissus and the other in regard to reading the statute as a whole — appear to be well settled. Under the first principle a casus omissus cannot be supplied by the court except in the case of…

Shree Cement Limited, Beawar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 152/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 250Section 32(1)(ii)Section 80Section 80I

…w and cannot legislate it. If a provision of law is misused and subjected to the abuse of process of law, it is for the Legislature to amend, modify or repeal it, if deemed necessary. (see Rishabh Agro Industries Ltd. vs. P. N. B. Capital Services Ltd. (2000) 5 SCC 515 ; (2000) 101 Comp Cas 284). The legislative causus omissus cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative process.” The rules of interpretation would come into play only if there is any doubt with regard to the express language used. Where the words are unequivocal, there is no scope for importing any rule of interpretation [Pandian Chemicals Limit…

Shalini Anand Murthy, Mumbai vs. ACIT 17(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2404/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri.Srinivas S KotaFor Respondent: Shri Satyapal Kumar, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 54F

…epeal it, if deemed necessary (see Rishab Agro Industries Lid. v, P.N.B.Capital Ltd. (see Rishab Agro Industries Lid. v, P.N.B.Capital Ltd. (see Rishab Agro Industries Lid. v, P.N.B.Capital Ltd. (2000J 101 Comp. Gas. 284: [20 (2000J 101 Comp. Gas. 284: [2000] 5 SCC 515); the 00] 5 SCC 515); the legislative casus omissus cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative principle. In interpreting a particular provision of law to ascertain the interpreting a particular provision of law to ascertain the meaning and intendment mea…

Nikhil Mohine, Parasia vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 38/JAB/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur18 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…and cannot legislate it. If a provision of law is misused and subjected to the abuse of the process of law, it is for the legislature to amend, modify or repeal it, if deemed necessary [See Rishabh Agro Industries Ltd. vs. P.N.B. Capital Services Ltd. (2000) 5 SCC 515]. The legislative casus omissus cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative process. The language of s. 6(1) is plain and unambiguous. There is no scope for reading something into it, as was done in Narasimhaiah’s case (supra). In Nanjudaiah’s case (supra), the period was further stretched to have the time period run from the date of service of t…

Nikhil Mohine, Chhindwara vs. DCIT, CPC, Benguluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 37/JAB/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur18 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…and cannot legislate it. If a provision of law is misused and subjected to the abuse of the process of law, it is for the legislature to amend, modify or repeal it, if deemed necessary [See Rishabh Agro Industries Ltd. vs. P.N.B. Capital Services Ltd. (2000) 5 SCC 515]. The legislative casus omissus cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative process. The language of s. 6(1) is plain and unambiguous. There is no scope for reading something into it, as was done in Narasimhaiah’s case (supra). In Nanjudaiah’s case (supra), the period was further stretched to have the time period run from the date of service of t…

DCIT, CC-3(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Ankit Metal & Power Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1493/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 115JSection 92C(2)

…M/s Ankit Metal & Power Ltd.., AY 2013-14 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 1493/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 DCIT, CC-3(3), Kolkata Vs M/s Ankit Metal & Power Ltd. . (PAN: AAECA 5230 B) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 23.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement 28.10.2021 For the Appellant Shri Anand Kumar Kedia, CIT Shri Gourav Kanojia,CITTP For the Respondent Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate ORDER Per Shri A. T. Varkey, JM: This is an appeal…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Futurz Next Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2396/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ashima Neb Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)

…a provision of law is misused and subjected to the abuse of process of law, it is for the Legislature to amend, modify or repeal it, if deemed necessary, to see Rishuhh Agro Industries Ltd. v. P.N.B. Capital Services Ltd. [2000] 101 Comp Cas 2S4 (SC): [2000] 5 SCC 515. The legislative causus omissus cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative process. Two principles of construction one relating to casus omissus and the other in regard to reading the statute as a whole appear to be well-settled. Under the first principle a casus omissus cannot be supplied by the court except in the ease of clear necessity and w…

ITO 7(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Rainbow Investment Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3431/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…M/s. Rainbow Investment Ltd., AY 2009-10 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/and "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A. No. 3431/Mum/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income-tax Officer, Wd-7(2)(1), Vs. M/s. Rainbow Investment Ltd. Mumbai Mumbai. (PAN: AAACR3915Q) Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 3068/Mum/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Rainbow Investment Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, Wd-7(2)(1), Mumbai. Mumbai Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 12.07.…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -4 vs. Interglobe Enterprises Ltd

ITA/456/2016HC Delhi19 Aug 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 454Section 481

…lowing expenses:- S.No. Expenses Amount (In Rs.) 1. Audit Fee 1,920/- 2. Professional Fee 8,850/- 3. Balance Amount 10,770/- 23. It is noted that the Supreme Court in Rishabh Agro Industries Limited v .P.N.B. Capital Services Limited (2000) 5 SCC 515 has held that winding up proceedings only starts the process of closing the affairs of the Company and ultimately order of dissolution of the Company has to be passed. Relevant extract of Rishabh Agro (supra) is reproduced below: “11. It may also be noticed that winding-up order passed under the Companies Act is not the culmination of the pro…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent as mentioned above on the preliminary issue and the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 3386/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.J.S.Reddyi.T.A .No.-3304/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, Corporate Office, Taxation Section, Circle-2(1), Room No.-398, First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Janpath, New Delhi-1110001. New Delhi Pan-Aabcb5576G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 80Section 80I

…R [1973] SC 1034; 2.Union of India & Others vs Deoki Nandan Aggarwal 922 Suppl. (1) SCC 323; 3.State of Kerala vs Mathai Verghese & Others [1986] 4 SCC 786. 8.14. Reliance was further placed upon Rishabh Agro Industries Services vs PNB Capital Services [2000] 5 SCC 515; and Padman Sundra Rao vs State of Tamil Page 12 of 44 I.T.A .No.-3304 & 3386/Del/2010 Nadu [2002] 255 ITR 147 (SC), for the proposition that it is one of the fundamental principles of interpretation of statute that omissions in statute as a general Rule cannot be supplied by construction. It was submitted that it is well-settled that while inter…

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent as mentioned above on the preliminary issue and the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 3304/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.J.S.Reddyi.T.A .No.-3304/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, Corporate Office, Taxation Section, Circle-2(1), Room No.-398, First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Janpath, New Delhi-1110001. New Delhi Pan-Aabcb5576G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 80Section 80I

…R [1973] SC 1034; 2.Union of India & Others vs Deoki Nandan Aggarwal 922 Suppl. (1) SCC 323; 3.State of Kerala vs Mathai Verghese & Others [1986] 4 SCC 786. 8.14. Reliance was further placed upon Rishabh Agro Industries Services vs PNB Capital Services [2000] 5 SCC 515; and Padman Sundra Rao vs State of Tamil Page 12 of 44 I.T.A .No.-3304 & 3386/Del/2010 Nadu [2002] 255 ITR 147 (SC), for the proposition that it is one of the fundamental principles of interpretation of statute that omissions in statute as a general Rule cannot be supplied by construction. It was submitted that it is well-settled that while inter…