Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT

108 ITR 345Supreme Court of India1977#430 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 366,470 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

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT

Acc Limited (Formerly Known As the Associated Cement Companies Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ACIT - Ltu, Mumbai

ITA 417/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…nstitutional principal and practice. Similar observations were made by the Supreme Court in the case of KeshavjiRavji& Others etc. Vs. CIT reported in 183 ITR 1 (Supreme Court). Further Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam& Ors Vs. CIT reported in 108 ITR 345 wherein it was observed that while interpreting the taxing statutes there is no scope for importing into the statue words which are not there. The intention of the legislature is primarily to be gathered horn the words used in the statute. Once the assessee comes within the letter of law, he must be taxed, however, great the hardship may appear t…

Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5692/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…nstitutional principal and practice. Similar observations were made by the Supreme Court in the case of KeshavjiRavji& Others etc. Vs. CIT reported in 183 ITR 1 (Supreme Court). Further Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam& Ors Vs. CIT reported in 108 ITR 345 wherein it was observed that while interpreting the taxing statutes there is no scope for importing into the statue words which are not there. The intention of the legislature is primarily to be gathered horn the words used in the statute. Once the assessee comes within the letter of law, he must be taxed, however, great the hardship may appear t…

Acc Ltd ( Formerly Known As the Associated Cement Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

ITA 5655/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Range 1(1) (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Mumbai Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Acc Limited V. Asst. Cit-Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Mumbai Cement Companies Ltd.) Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit – Ltu V. M/S. Acc Limited 28Th Floor, Centre-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 251Section 44A

…nstitutional principal and practice. Similar observations were made by the Supreme Court in the case of KeshavjiRavji& Others etc. Vs. CIT reported in 183 ITR 1 (Supreme Court). Further Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam& Ors Vs. CIT reported in 108 ITR 345 wherein it was observed that while interpreting the taxing statutes there is no scope for importing into the statue words which are not there. The intention of the legislature is primarily to be gathered horn the words used in the statute. Once the assessee comes within the letter of law, he must be taxed, however, great the hardship may appear t…

V Sriram (HUF), Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 863/CHNY/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.863/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S.V.Sriram (Huf), V. The Asst. Commissioner- 7, Ab Iii Block, Of Income Tax (Osd), Kences Enclave, Non-Corporate Ward-2(1), No.1, Ramakrishna Street, Chennai-34. T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. [Pan: Aarhs 1926 C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.R.Sivaraman, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.02.2023

For Respondent: Mr.D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 2(22)(e)

…: 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. The same view was earlier expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tarulata Shyam in 108 ITR 345, wherein the Apex Court held that deemed dividend is applicable even in cases where there is no balance outstanding on the year end. 7. The accumulated profit as on 31.03.201.5 in the books of the company M/s.Integrated Er1terprises India Private Ltd., is Rs. 29.62 crore excluding the general reserve of Rs.25 crores. 4. Being aggrieved by the ass…