State of Madras v. Madurai Mills Co. Ltd.

1 SCR 732Supreme Court of India1967#16275 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Also reported as

19 STC 144

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 154Section 10(23AAA)Section 115-AASection 115-JAASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

doctrine of mergertangible materialescapement of incomereason to believesection 154income-tax officernotice under section 148reassessment proceedingsassistant commissionersection 15section 148transfer

Judgments citing State of Madras v. Madurai Mills Co. Ltd.

The South Indian Bank, Thrissur vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1) & Tps, Thrissur

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 284/COCH/2024[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2025AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoshri Sandeep Singh Karhailthe South Indian Bank Limited, Head Office, Mission Quarters, Tb Road, Thrissur Kerala - 680001 ............... Appellant Pan : Aabct0022F V/S Dcit, Circle – 1(1) & Tps ……………… Respondent Thrissur, Kerala

For Appellant: Shri Naresh C, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 234DSection 250

…r revision, there is a fusion or merger of the two orders irrespective of the subject-matter of the appellate or revisional order and the scope of the appeal or revision contemplated by particular statute, vide State of Madras v. Madurai Mills Co. Ltd. [1967] 19 STC 144 (SC). The same can be also said of the effect of merger or fusion when the original order is rectified in any part. It can be equally said that the original order does not get completely merged or fused in the rectification order. The fusion or merger by virtue of the rectification order passed is only to the extent it relates to the matter consid…

Kerala State Cooperative Employees Pension Board, Thiruvananthapuram vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption Circle, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 223/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Amaljith P.J., CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 154Section 239Section 80A

…ed 08.06.2023 passed u/s. 154 of the Act by holding that in the absence of a valid return of income no refund can be granted and also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd. [1992] Supp 1 SCR 732) saying that the reassessment proceedings cannot be beneficial to the assessee. 3 Kerala State Co-op. Employees Pension Board 4. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 5. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 6. We have heard the…

M/S Apex Transworld Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT CC-1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 932/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.932/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. M/S.Apex Transworld Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of 38, 2Nd Main Road, Income Tax, R.A. Puram, Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai-600 028. Chennai. [Pan: Aadca 7034 L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.K. Ramesh Babu, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. Ar.V.Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.01.2023

For Respondent: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…, has rejected the fresh claim made by the assessee towards computation of long term capital gains on building by :: 4 :: relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. M/s.Sun Engineering Workings (P.) reported in [1992] Supp. 1 SCR 732 a. The relevant findings of the AO are as under: 5. Disallowance of Excess claimed cost of acquisition: 5.1. The assessee company purchased 3rd floor and 4 floor of capital tower, 180 Kodambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34 from FLSMIDTH Private Limited during the year 2006 and the assessee company also acquired cubicles, workstation and…

M/S Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. JCIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1041/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
Section 127(2)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…ision conferring M/s. Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., the appellate or revisional jurisdiction. Reliance in this connection may be placed on the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Madras v. Madurai Mills Co. Ltd. [1967] 1 SCR 732, 736 ; 19 STC 144 (SC) and in the case of Commissioner of Income- tax v. Amritlal Bhogilal & Co. [1958] 34 ITR 130 (SC). In the instant case whether the petitioner was a company in which the public were substantially interested or not is a point which could have been the subject-matter of appeal and decision by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner…

M/S Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Private Limited (Earlier Know As M/S Edelweiss Commodities Services Limited), Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1040/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2022AY 2012-13
Section 127(2)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…ision conferring M/s. Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., the appellate or revisional jurisdiction. Reliance in this connection may be placed on the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Madras v. Madurai Mills Co. Ltd. [1967] 1 SCR 732, 736 ; 19 STC 144 (SC) and in the case of Commissioner of Income- tax v. Amritlal Bhogilal & Co. [1958] 34 ITR 130 (SC). In the instant case whether the petitioner was a company in which the public were substantially interested or not is a point which could have been the subject-matter of appeal and decision by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner…

M/S Bhartiya Samruddhi Finance Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 6022/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: Shri KVSR. Krishna, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…n 148 for the impugned assessment year and has not submitted any documentary evidence in support of its revised return of income. Relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., M/s. Sun Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd., reported in [1992] 1 SCR 732 wherein it has been held that assessee cannot take advantage of reopening for review of concluded items, the A.O. rejected the revised return of income filed by the assessee. Thus, the A.O. determined the total income of assessee at Rs.5,43,49,450/- by adding the amount of Rs.1.07 crores to the returned income of Rs.4,36,49,450/-. 2.2. The assesse…

State of Madras v. Madurai Mills Co. Ltd. (1 SCR 732) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax