Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT

108 ITR 345Supreme Court of India1977#429 most cited

What is Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT authority for?

Taxing statutes must be interpreted strictly, assuming that the law-making authority does not commit a mistake or make an omission. There is no room for purposive interpretation under direct tax laws.

209

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

Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT · 108 ITR 345 SC · strict interpretation taxing statutes · no purposive interpretation direct tax laws · legislative intent no omission · Section 143(3) · Section 147 · Section 148 · Section 5 · Section 4 · Section 6 · Section 139(1) · Income Tax Act interpretation

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 132Section 148Section 5Section 4Section 6Section 139(1)

Issues it is cited on

accumulated profitsdeemed dividendsection 2(22)section 2(22)(e)mercantile system of accountingbook profitscommercial expediencyliable to taxdisallowance u/s 14adisallowance under section 14anon-residentsection 40(a)

Judgments citing Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT

ADITYA ARUNKUMAR PODDAR,PUNE vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2758/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Apr 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2757/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Ashwinikumar Ramkumar Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(2), Poddar, Pune. Plot No.342, Sind Society, Baner Road, Aundh, Pune- 411007. Pan : Aarpp7606E Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2758/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Aditya Arunkumar Poddar, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(2), Plot No.130, Sind Society, Pune. Baner Road, Aundh, Pune- 411007. Pan : Ahspp3084G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sarvesh Kandelwal Revenue By : Smt. Sonal L. Sonkavde Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 10.04.2026 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 28.10.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A), Pune-11 [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2021-22 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Two Different Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.2757/Pun/2025 For Adjudication As The Lead Case.

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh KandelwalFor Respondent: Smt. Sonal L. Sonkavde
Section 02Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 22

…en ultimately repaid or adjusted but that will not alter the fact that the assessee, in the eye of law, had received dividend from the company during the relevant accounting period. 9. It was held by this Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 345 that the statutory fiction created by section 2(6A)(e) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 would come into operation at the time of the payment of advance or loan to a shareholder by the company. The Legislature had deliberately not made the subsistence of the loan or advance, or its remaining outstanding, on the last date of the previous year sta…

ASHWINIKUMAR RAMKUMAR PODDAR,PUNE vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2757/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Apr 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2757/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Ashwinikumar Ramkumar Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(2), Poddar, Pune. Plot No.342, Sind Society, Baner Road, Aundh, Pune- 411007. Pan : Aarpp7606E Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2758/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Aditya Arunkumar Poddar, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(2), Plot No.130, Sind Society, Pune. Baner Road, Aundh, Pune- 411007. Pan : Ahspp3084G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sarvesh Kandelwal Revenue By : Smt. Sonal L. Sonkavde Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 10.04.2026 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 28.10.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A), Pune-11 [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2021-22 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Two Different Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.2757/Pun/2025 For Adjudication As The Lead Case.

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh KandelwalFor Respondent: Smt. Sonal L. Sonkavde
Section 02Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 22

…en ultimately repaid or adjusted but that will not alter the fact that the assessee, in the eye of law, had received dividend from the company during the relevant accounting period. 9. It was held by this Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 345 that the statutory fiction created by section 2(6A)(e) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 would come into operation at the time of the payment of advance or loan to a shareholder by the company. The Legislature had deliberately not made the subsistence of the loan or advance, or its remaining outstanding, on the last date of the previous year sta…

SMT. SHREE JAIN ,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, we hold that

ITA 2565/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsmt. Shree Jain, 17/1, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Anurag Ali Asker Rod, Off. Tax, Central Circle-5(2), Mumbai. Chunningham Road, 1/24, Room No.634, Aayakar Bhawan, Marsh Bangalore-560052. Karve Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- 400020. Pan/Gir No:Aarpj4573A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

….3 As regards the claim of the assessee that the LTCG capital gain arose on receipt of 84 flats from the SLEPL in lieu of sale amount in AY 2019-20, there is no legal basis for such claim. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Tarulata Shyam vs. CIT 108 ITR 345 (SC), two principles deductible from section 4(1) are: (i) that the tax is levied on the total income of the assessee and (ii) each previous years is a distinct unit of time for the purpose of assessment, and the profits made or liabilities or losses incurred before or after the relevant previous year is wholly immaterial in assessing the profi…

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. MADINENI SITARAMAIAH, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed, and the cross- objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 598/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Us:

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…en ultimately repaid or adjusted but that will not alter the fact that the assessee, in the eye of law, had received dividend from the company during the relevant accounting period. 9. It was held by this Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 345 that the statutory fiction created by section 2(6A)(e) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 would come into operation at the time of the payment of advance or loan to a shareholder by the company. The Legislature had deliberately not made the subsistence of the loan or advance, or its remaining outstanding, on the last date of the previous year rel…

AFSANA BEGUM,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 113/GTY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 250Section 56

…s vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle XV, Chennai [2018] 100 ITA No.: 113/GTY/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Afsana Begum. taxmann.com 178 (Madras)/[2019] 417 ITR 223 (Madras)[25-09- 2018], Smt. Tarulata Shyam vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC)[28-04-1977], Miss P. Sarada vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 96 Taxman 11 (SC)/[1998] 229 ITR 444 (SC)/[1998] 144 CTR 209 (SC)[09-12-1997] in support of the claim that no addition could have been made on account of deemed dividend during the assessment year as no loan was received during the impugned A.Y. 2020-21. 6. It was also stated…

VALUZHATHIL PADMANABHAN SIVADASAN,THIRUVALLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD-2, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 770/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2015-16 Valuzhathil Padmanabhan Sivadasan .......... Appellant Valuzhathil House, Kozhuvalloor, Thiruvalla [Pan: Akaps3606C] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Thiruvalla .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Stephen George, Ar Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.11.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Noida [Cit(A)] Dated 25.08.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Non-Resident Indian. No Regular Return Of Income Under The Provisions Of Section 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Was Filed By The Appellant. The Dcit (International Taxation) Lkn (Hereinafter Called "The Ao"), Based On The Information That The Appellant Made Term Deposits In Bank & Earned Interest Income Of Deposits, Formed An Opinion That Income Escaped Assessment To Tax. Accordingly, The 2 Valuzhathil Padmanabhan Sivadasan Ao Issued A Notice U/S. 148 Of The Act After Duly Complying The Provisions Of Section 148(A) Of The Act. In Response To The Notice U/S. 148, The Appellant Filed Return Of Income For Ay 2016-17 On 30.08.2022 Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 2,44,870/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Ao Vide Order Dated 26.05.2023 Passed U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144C(3) Of The Act At Total Income Of Rs. 35,01,948/-. While Doing So, The Ao Brought To Tax The Income Of Salary Of Rs. 32,57,078/-.

For Appellant: Shri Stephen George, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 4(1)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM Assessment Year: 2015-16 Valuzhathil Padmanabhan Sivadasan .......... Appellant Valuzhathil House, Kozhuvalloor, Thiruvalla [PAN: AKAPS3606C] vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Thiruvalla .......... Respondent Assessee by: Shri Stephen George, AR Revenue by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 06.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 21.11.2025 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Noida [CIT(A)] dated 25.08.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. 2.…

MOHAMMED KUTTY PUDUKKUDI,MALAPPURAM vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 774/COCH/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mohammed Kutty Pudukkudi .......... Appellant 4/61, Pudukkudi House, Ponmundam P.O. (Via) Tirur 676106 [Pan: Afepp4646J] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Kozhikode ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri C.B.M. Warrier, Ca Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri C.B.M. Warrier, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mohammed Kutty Pudukkudi .......... Appellant 4/61, Pudukkudi House, Ponmundam P.O. (via) Tirur 676106 [PAN: AFEPP4646J] vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Kozhikode ......... Respondent Assessee by: Shri C.B.M. Warrier, CA Revenue by: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 06.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kochi [CIT(A)…

WATERWORLD TOURISM COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,ALAPPUZHA vs. ITO WARD 1 & TPS, ALAPPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 726/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2018-19 Water World Tourism Company Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant Room No. 18, Municipal Shopping Centre Zilla Court Ward, Opp. Boat Jetty Thathampally S.O., Alappuzha 688013 [Pan: Aabcm3387L] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wd-1& Tps, Alappuzha ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Thomas Joseph, Ca Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Thomas Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…sessee in British India at the time when these payments were made by the merchants to them." 25. The above ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Keshav Mills Ltd. (supra) was reiterated in series of decisions like Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC); CIT v. Dharamdas Hargovandas [1961] 42 ITR 427 (SC); Benares State Bank Ltd. v. CIT [1970] 75 ITR 167 (SC). This position of law also been accepted by the CBDT vide para 2 of the CBDT Circular No. 5 in [F.No.73A/2(69)-IT (A-II)], dated 20-2-1969. which extracted below :- "Migrant assessee - Money remitted to India through banks - Enquiries…

SEEMA SUREKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2682/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 250Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…lied upon by the appellant in the instant case, has been\ndistinguished by the Hon'ble Bench in the case of Gyanchand M. Bardia (supra).\nWhile relying on hon'ble apex court's judgment in CIT v. Sodra Devi [1957] 32 ITR\n615, Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC) and Keshavji Ravji&\nCo. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC), the Hon'ble bench has observed that\nprinciples of literal interpretation in respect of the relevant context vis-à-vis the\nlegislation intention have to be applied here as there is no ambiguity in definition\nof a \"relative\" in respect to an individual donee in the above…

LSL TOOLS (P) LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CC-1, FARIDABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 5644/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153DSection 234CSection 40A(2)(b)

…gla under the head "Income from Other Sources", therefore the addition made by disallowing the director remuneration in the hands of the appellant, would lead to double taxation, which is not permissible in law. Reliance is placed upon following judgments: i) 42 ITR 427 (SC) CIT vs. DharamdasHargovandas ii) 72 ITR 291 (SC) LaxmipatSinghaniavs.CIT iii) 118 ITR 50 (SC) State of U.P. vs Raja Buland Sugar Co.Ltd iv) 404 ITR 738 (SC) Mahaveer Kumar Jain v. CIT v) 258 ITR 717 (Del) ITO v. Vinod Kumar Soni ……… 36. It is further submitted that it is settled law that no addition/disallowance can be made on the basis of su…

LSL TOOLS (P) LTD,GURUGRAM vs. ACIT , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, FARIDABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 5643/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153DSection 234CSection 40A(2)(b)

…gla under the head "Income from Other Sources", therefore the addition made by disallowing the director remuneration in the hands of the appellant, would lead to double taxation, which is not permissible in law. Reliance is placed upon following judgments: i) 42 ITR 427 (SC) CIT vs. DharamdasHargovandas ii) 72 ITR 291 (SC) LaxmipatSinghaniavs.CIT iii) 118 ITR 50 (SC) State of U.P. vs Raja Buland Sugar Co.Ltd iv) 404 ITR 738 (SC) Mahaveer Kumar Jain v. CIT v) 258 ITR 717 (Del) ITO v. Vinod Kumar Soni ……… 36. It is further submitted that it is settled law that no addition/disallowance can be made on the basis of su…

ARYANS EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST REGD, MOHALI,MOHALI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 1136/CHANDI/2024[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1136/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2025-26 Aryans Educational & The Cit (Exemptions), Charitable Trust, Regd.Mohali Vs Chandigarh, C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate, # 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabta7550L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(ii)Section 13(3)

…tive applicability of the authority to cancel u/s 12AA(3) is clearly beyond the call and scope of the duty of the Courts which is only to interpret the law as it exists. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam v.CL [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC) is also being relied upon in this context. A registration under section 12AA(l)(b) is to be granted where CIT is satisfied about the objects and the genuineness of the activities carried on by the applicant. Section 12.-V empowers the CIT to cancel such registration if he is satisfied that activities of trust or institution are not genuine o…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. NIRANJAN KOIRALA,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2253/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.2253/िद"ी/2010(िन.व. 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-31(1), R. No. 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2 Block, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Civic Centre, Jln Marg, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi बनाम Vs. Niranjan Koirala, 27, Akbar Road, New Delhi ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaupk-0483-B Assessee By : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Department By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 23.05.2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 18.02.2010, For Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. This Appeal Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 20.07.2018. Thereafter, The Revenue Filed Miscellaneous Application Seeking Rectification In The Order Of Tribunal On The Ground That The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Vide Application Dated 13.08.2014 Remained To Be Decided. The Tribunal In Ma No. 732/Del/2018 Vide Order Dated 10.07.2023 Recalled The Order

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 54F

…te is a taxing statute, it has to be assumed that the law making authority does not commit a mistake or make an omission. These trite propositions in law have been exposited in a catena of judgements, one of which was pronounced in Smt. Tarulata Shyam Vs. CIT 108 ITR 345 (SC). It is also well settled that there is no room for purposive interpretation under the direct tax laws and in this connection one may advert to the ratios in (1998) 234 ITR 261 (MP) Laxmandas Pranchand Vs. Union of India & Ors.; (1999) 236 /TR 595 (Cal) CIT Vs. Central Concrete & Allied Products Ltd. and (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC) CIT Vs. A.M. H.…

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

…as further held that legislative casus omissus cannot be supplied by judicial interpretative process and that it is for the Legislature to amend, modify or repeal it, if deemed necessary. The Similar view has been taken in Smt. Tarulata Shyam -vs.- CIT (1977) 108 ITR 345 (SC). (viii) Similarly, Hon’ble Apex Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. –vs.- DCIT (2017) 81 taxmann.com 111 (SC) has held that where the words of the statute are clear and unambiguous, recourse cannot be had to principles of interpretation other than the literal view. Reliance is further placed on following decision : - CIT –vs.…

INVOLUTE ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 12(2), NEW DELHI

The appeals is allowed

ITA 6884/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2013-14 Involute Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, E-30, Anand Niketan, Circle-12(2), Basement, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 001. Pan: Aaacs2041N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Arora, Ca; Ms Pallavi Sharma, Ca & Shri Jeetan Nagpal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.05.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-22, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’, For Short) In Appeal No.208/18-19/Cit(A)-22, New Delhi Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 18.03.2016, Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The Dcit, Circle- 12(2), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Arora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: C : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 Involute Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, E-30, Anand Niketan, Circle-12(2), Basement, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 001. PAN: AAACS2041N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sanjay Arora, CA; Ms Pallavi Sharma, CA & Shri Jeetan Nagpal, CA Revenue by : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against the order da…

HEMANT GORDHANBHAI PATEL,NADIAD vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN., VADODARA

In the result, Ground No. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1684/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divyakant Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250Section 69

…merchants to them." Hemant Gordhanbhai Patel (Individual) vs. ACIT Asst.Year –2014-15 - 11– 25. The above ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Keshav Mills Ltd. (supra) was reiterated in series of decisions like Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC); CIT v. Dharamdas Hargovandas [1961] 42 ITR 427 (SC); Benares State Bank Ltd. v. CIT [1970] 75 ITR 167 (SC). This position of law also been accepted by the CBDT vide para 2 of the CBDT Circular No. 5 in [F.No.73A/2(69)-IT (A-II)], dated 20-2-1969. which extracted below :- "Migrant assessee - Money remitted to India through banks - Enquiries…

BARMINCO INDIAN UNDERGROUND MINING SERVICES LLP,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-28(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2253/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.2253/िद"ी/2010(िन.व. 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-31(1), R. No. 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2 Block, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Civic Centre, Jln Marg, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi बनाम Vs. Niranjan Koirala, 27, Akbar Road, New Delhi ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaupk-0483-B Assessee By : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Department By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 23.05.2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 18.02.2010, For Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. This Appeal Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 20.07.2018. Thereafter, The Revenue Filed Miscellaneous Application Seeking Rectification In The Order Of Tribunal On The Ground That The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Vide Application Dated 13.08.2014 Remained To Be Decided. The Tribunal In Ma No. 732/Del/2018 Vide Order Dated 10.07.2023 Recalled The Order

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 54F

…te is a taxing statute, it has to be assumed that the law making authority does not commit a mistake or make an omission. These trite propositions in law have been exposited in a catena of judgements, one of which was pronounced in Smt. Tarulata Shyam Vs. CIT 108 ITR 345 (SC). It is also well settled that there is no room for purposive interpretation under the direct tax laws and in this connection one may advert to the ratios in (1998) 234 ITR 261 (MP) Laxmandas Pranchand Vs. Union of India & Ors.; (1999) 236 /TR 595 (Cal) CIT Vs. Central Concrete & Allied Products Ltd. and (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC) CIT Vs. A.M. H.…

PUSHPA VIDYA NIKETAN SAMITI,,KOTA vs. ACITDCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

ITA 315/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT- Ld. DR
Section 11Section 131Section 133ASection 234BSection 250

…party, the presumption set out in Section 292C of the Act does not apply to the appellant. 10. It may also be mentioned that as per well-established law as explained by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT 1977 CTR (SC) 275: [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC), there is no scope for importing into the statute words which are not there. The intention of the legislature is primarily to be gathered from the words used in the statute. Once the assessee comes within the letter of law he must be taxed. In the case of L.P. Cardoza v. Agrl. ITO [1998] 144 CTR (Kar) 474: [1997] 227 ITR 421 (Kar), it has be…

PUSHPA VIDYA NIKETAN SAMITI,,KOTA vs. ACITDCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE,, KOTA

ITA 314/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT- Ld. DR
Section 11Section 131Section 133ASection 234BSection 250

…party, the presumption set out in Section 292C of the Act does not apply to the appellant. 10. It may also be mentioned that as per well-established law as explained by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT 1977 CTR (SC) 275: [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC), there is no scope for importing into the statute words which are not there. The intention of the legislature is primarily to be gathered from the words used in the statute. Once the assessee comes within the letter of law he must be taxed. In the case of L.P. Cardoza v. Agrl. ITO [1998] 144 CTR (Kar) 474: [1997] 227 ITR 421 (Kar), it has be…

PUSHPA VIDYA NIKETAN SAMITI,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, , KOTA

ITA 313/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT- Ld. DR
Section 11Section 131Section 133ASection 234BSection 250

…party, the presumption set out in Section 292C of the Act does not apply to the appellant. 10. It may also be mentioned that as per well-established law as explained by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT 1977 CTR (SC) 275: [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC), there is no scope for importing into the statute words which are not there. The intention of the legislature is primarily to be gathered from the words used in the statute. Once the assessee comes within the letter of law he must be taxed. In the case of L.P. Cardoza v. Agrl. ITO [1998] 144 CTR (Kar) 474: [1997] 227 ITR 421 (Kar), it has be…

Showing 1–20 of 209 · Page 1 of 11

...
Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT (108 ITR 345) — Cited in 209 Judgments | BharatTax