Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT

195 ITR 769High Court1992#4081 most cited

What is Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT authority for?

The rule of consistency in tax proceedings, an exception to the principle that each assessment year is a separate unit, is well-recognized and should not be ignored.

29

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Sardar Kehar Singh v CIT · 195 ITR 769 · rule of consistency · tax proceedings · assessment year · Radhasoami Satsang v CIT · section 143(3) · section 142

Also reported as

92 CTR 88

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 1961Section 10A(a)Section 10B(1)Section 10B(e)Section 11Section 12Section 131 of the Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

rule of consistencysection 10(38)short term capital gainsection 142section 27previous yeartransfersection 11section 142(1)section 143(2)section 144company

Judgments citing Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT

A.C.I.T. 4(2), Mumbai vs. Vimla Suresh Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4476/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…ng: (i) Where the earlier finding was not arbitrary or perverse. (ii) Where the earlier finding was arrived at after making due inquiries. (iii) Where no fresh facts were placed before the authority giving the later decision, Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 769 (Raj); CIT v. Murugappa Chettair (S) (1992) 197 ITR 575 (Ker); Godavarl Devi Sehgal v. ITO (1992) 198 ITR 108 (A T) (Del). (iv) Where the authority giving the earlier decision had taken into consideration all material evidence, CIT v. Kusum Bader (1990) 185 ITR 70 (Raj). (v) Where unsettling the earlier decision leads to injustice to the assessee…

A.C.I.T. 4(2), Mumbai vs. Suresh K. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4475/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…ng: (i) Where the earlier finding was not arbitrary or perverse. (ii) Where the earlier finding was arrived at after making due inquiries. (iii) Where no fresh facts were placed before the authority giving the later decision, Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 769 (Raj); CIT v. Murugappa Chettair (S) (1992) 197 ITR 575 (Ker); Godavarl Devi Sehgal v. ITO (1992) 198 ITR 108 (A T) (Del). (iv) Where the authority giving the earlier decision had taken into consideration all material evidence, CIT v. Kusum Bader (1990) 185 ITR 70 (Raj). (v) Where unsettling the earlier decision leads to injustice to the assessee…

Suresh K Jajoo, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4366/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…ng: (i) Where the earlier finding was not arbitrary or perverse. (ii) Where the earlier finding was arrived at after making due inquiries. (iii) Where no fresh facts were placed before the authority giving the later decision, Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 769 (Raj); CIT v. Murugappa Chettair (S) (1992) 197 ITR 575 (Ker); Godavarl Devi Sehgal v. ITO (1992) 198 ITR 108 (A T) (Del). (iv) Where the authority giving the earlier decision had taken into consideration all material evidence, CIT v. Kusum Bader (1990) 185 ITR 70 (Raj). (v) Where unsettling the earlier decision leads to injustice to the assessee…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Suresh K Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5303/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…ng: (i) Where the earlier finding was not arbitrary or perverse. (ii) Where the earlier finding was arrived at after making due inquiries. (iii) Where no fresh facts were placed before the authority giving the later decision, Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 769 (Raj); CIT v. Murugappa Chettair (S) (1992) 197 ITR 575 (Ker); Godavarl Devi Sehgal v. ITO (1992) 198 ITR 108 (A T) (Del). (iv) Where the authority giving the earlier decision had taken into consideration all material evidence, CIT v. Kusum Bader (1990) 185 ITR 70 (Raj). (v) Where unsettling the earlier decision leads to injustice to the assessee…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Vimla S. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5302/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…ng: (i) Where the earlier finding was not arbitrary or perverse. (ii) Where the earlier finding was arrived at after making due inquiries. (iii) Where no fresh facts were placed before the authority giving the later decision, Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 769 (Raj); CIT v. Murugappa Chettair (S) (1992) 197 ITR 575 (Ker); Godavarl Devi Sehgal v. ITO (1992) 198 ITR 108 (A T) (Del). (iv) Where the authority giving the earlier decision had taken into consideration all material evidence, CIT v. Kusum Bader (1990) 185 ITR 70 (Raj). (v) Where unsettling the earlier decision leads to injustice to the assessee…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Suresh K Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 3053/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…ng: (i) Where the earlier finding was not arbitrary or perverse. (ii) Where the earlier finding was arrived at after making due inquiries. (iii) Where no fresh facts were placed before the authority giving the later decision, Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 769 (Raj); CIT v. Murugappa Chettair (S) (1992) 197 ITR 575 (Ker); Godavarl Devi Sehgal v. ITO (1992) 198 ITR 108 (A T) (Del). (iv) Where the authority giving the earlier decision had taken into consideration all material evidence, CIT v. Kusum Bader (1990) 185 ITR 70 (Raj). (v) Where unsettling the earlier decision leads to injustice to the assessee…

DCIT 4(2), Mumbai vs. Vimla S. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 2469/MUM/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…ng: (i) Where the earlier finding was not arbitrary or perverse. (ii) Where the earlier finding was arrived at after making due inquiries. (iii) Where no fresh facts were placed before the authority giving the later decision, Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 769 (Raj); CIT v. Murugappa Chettair (S) (1992) 197 ITR 575 (Ker); Godavarl Devi Sehgal v. ITO (1992) 198 ITR 108 (A T) (Del). (iv) Where the authority giving the earlier decision had taken into consideration all material evidence, CIT v. Kusum Bader (1990) 185 ITR 70 (Raj). (v) Where unsettling the earlier decision leads to injustice to the assessee…

ACIT Cir-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Suresh K. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5442/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…ng: (i) Where the earlier finding was not arbitrary or perverse. (ii) Where the earlier finding was arrived at after making due inquiries. (iii) Where no fresh facts were placed before the authority giving the later decision, Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 769 (Raj); CIT v. Murugappa Chettair (S) (1992) 197 ITR 575 (Ker); Godavarl Devi Sehgal v. ITO (1992) 198 ITR 108 (A T) (Del). (iv) Where the authority giving the earlier decision had taken into consideration all material evidence, CIT v. Kusum Bader (1990) 185 ITR 70 (Raj). (v) Where unsettling the earlier decision leads to injustice to the assessee…

ACIT Cir-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Vimla S. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5441/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…ng: (i) Where the earlier finding was not arbitrary or perverse. (ii) Where the earlier finding was arrived at after making due inquiries. (iii) Where no fresh facts were placed before the authority giving the later decision, Sardar Kehar Singh v. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 769 (Raj); CIT v. Murugappa Chettair (S) (1992) 197 ITR 575 (Ker); Godavarl Devi Sehgal v. ITO (1992) 198 ITR 108 (A T) (Del). (iv) Where the authority giving the earlier decision had taken into consideration all material evidence, CIT v. Kusum Bader (1990) 185 ITR 70 (Raj). (v) Where unsettling the earlier decision leads to injustice to the assessee…