Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co. v. CIT, A.P.II

6 SCC 611Reported decision1996#18182 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2021.

Judgments citing Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co. v. CIT, A.P.II

SMT. S. JALAJA vs. UNION OF INDIA

In the result, writ appeals are allowed

WA/1105/2019HC Karnataka24 Aug 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 4

…RAL GAS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT' (2004) 4 SCC 489, 'CHAIRMAN, INDORE VIKAS PRADHIKARAN Vs. PURE INDUSTRIAL COKE AND CHEMICALS LTD. & ORS.' (2007) 8 SCC 705, 'DEVINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB' (2008) 1 SCC 728, 'JOHN VALLAMATTOM Vs. UNION OF INDIA' (2003) 6 SCC 611, 'KAPILA HINGO RANI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR' (2003) 6 SCC 1, 'SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE Vs. SEBI' (2013) 1 SCC 1, 'RAJENDRA SHANKAR SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF CHATTISGARH' (2015) 10 SCC 400 AND 'KEDARNATH YADAV Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL' (2017) 11 SCC 601. 103 SUBMISSIONS OF RESPONDENTS IN WRIT PETITION 14. Learned Senior counsel…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI - 10 vs. INDIAN FARM FORESTRY DEVELOPMENT

ITA/216/2017HC Delhi31 Oct 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

Section 260ASection 37Section 37(1)Section 80G

…ness. The expenditure would satisfy the said test if it is for the purposes of business. 11. Kuber Singh Bhagwandas (supra) was referred to with approval by the Supreme Court in Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co. V. CIT, A.P.II (1996) 6 SCC 611 to hold that money expended even voluntarily on the grounds of commercial expediency in order to indirectly facilitate carrying on of the business should be regarded as expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of trade. In this case, following passage from Atherton v. British Insulated & Helsey Cables (1925) 10 TC 155 was quoted :-…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-10 vs. M/S INDIAN FARM FORESTRY DEVELOPMENT

ITA-215/2017HC Delhi31 Oct 2018

Section 260ASection 37Section 37(1)Section 80G

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-1) vs. LATE SHRI SUDHIR SAREEN

ITA/284/2015HC Delhi06 Jul 2015

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

Section 375

…ose which were enacted after the Constitution came into force. The appropriate provision that the court ought to have discussed is Article 13(1) of the Constitution. Even though, the court notices its judgment in John Vallamattom v. Union of India, (2003) 6 SCC 6115 which adverts to Article 13 of the Constitution, there is no discussion of that article in Navtej Singh Johar. (b) In Navtej Singh Johar, although the court referred to the judgments rendered in Chiranjit Lal Chowdhuri v. Union of India, 1950 SCR 869 and State of Bombay v. F.N. Balsara, 1951 SCR 682, both of which dealt with pre-constituti…

INCOME TAX, vs. OF INDIA PVT. LTD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA/111/2008HC Delhi21 Aug 2008

For Appellant: Mr R D Jolly with Mr Paras ChaudhryFor Respondent: None

Section 143Section 260ASection 37

…ty of the expense is not dependent on the fact that it is incurred to fulfill or discharge a legal obligation. See: (i) Jugal Kishore Baldev Sahai v. CIT : AIR 1967 SC 495; (ii) Sri Venkata Satyanarayana Rice Mill Contractors Co v. CIT, AP-II: (1996) 6 SCC 611; (iii) CIT v. Walchand & Co. Pvt. Ltd : AIR 1967 SC 1435 = 65 ITR 381; (iv) M/s Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt Ltd v. CIT Bombay : 1979 (3) SCC 524; (v) The CIT, West Bengal v. Birla Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills & Another : (1971) 3 SCC 344 (vi) SA Builders Ltd v. CIT ; 2007 (1) SCC 781. 8.5 Keeping in mind the aforesaid test, let us e…