State of Maharashtra, AIR 1970 Bom 166; Dahari and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2 SCC 273)

Q: What is State of Maharashtra, AIR 1970 Bom 166; Dahari and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh authority for?

Non-examination of an additional witness in support of the prosecution's case is a matter of corroboration and not a mandatory requirement for conviction. Courts prioritize the quality of evidence over its quantity.

Q: How many judgments cite State of Maharashtra, AIR 1970 Bom 166; Dahari and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh?

20 judgments on BharatTax cite State of Maharashtra, AIR 1970 Bom 166; Dahari and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2 SCC 273), spanning 2007 to 2025.

Q: Which sections of the Income Tax Act does State of Maharashtra, AIR 1970 Bom 166; Dahari and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 11U, Section 11UA, Section 132, Section 133(6), Section 139(1), Section 142(1).

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Aathmika Holdings Pvt Ltd, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stand dismissed and the

ITA 836/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 56(2)(x)Section 92C

…ourt of law/Tribunal, for that would be to make law. It is settled that courts are not entitled to usurp legislative function under the disguise of interpretation [refer Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in D.R. Venkatachalia vs Dy Transport Commissioner (1977) 2 SCC 273]. As noted, while interpreting a provision, the Court only interprets the law and cannot legislate. If a provision of law is misused and subjected to abuse of process of law, it is for the legislature to amend, modify or repeal it, if deemed necessary, [refer Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in M/s Popular Trading Company (2000) (5) SCC 515] In the…

Vinubhai Mohanlal Dobaria vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms

C.A. No.-001977-001977 - 2025Supreme Court07 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

Section 143(1)Section 276C

…8 FR 547] .) The view was reiterated in Union of India v. Filip Tiago De Gama of Vedem Vasco De Gama [(1990) 1 SCC 277 : AIR 1990 SC 981] and Padma Sundara Rao v. State of T.N. [(2002) 3 SCC 533] 14. In D.R. Venkatachalam v. Dy. Transport Commr. [(1977) 2 SCC 273] it was observed that courts must avoid the danger of a priori determination of the meaning of a provision based on their own preconceived notions of ideological structure or scheme into which the provision to be interpreted is somewhat fitted. They are not entitled to usurp legislative function under the disguise of interpretation.…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Circle-1, Bengaluru vs. Rashtrotthana Parishat, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1666/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017=18

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra CIT-D.RFor Respondent: Sri Prakash Shridhar Hegde, CA

Section 11Section 11(6)Section 250Section 270ASection 274

…ch lie behind them’. (See Lenigh Valley Coal Co. v. Yensavage 218 FR 547). The view was reiterated in Union of India v. Filip Tiago De Gama of Vedem Vasco De Gama [1990] 1 SCC 277 (SCC p. 284, para 16). 16. In D.R. Venkatachalam v. Dy. Transport Commr. [1977] 2 SCC 273, it was observed that the courts must avoid the danger of a prior determination of the meaning of a provision based on their own preconceived notions of ideological structure or scheme into which the provision to be interpreted is somewhat fitted. They are not entitled to usurp legislative function under the disguise of interpretation. 17. While in…

M/S Bharti Airtel Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune III

C.A. No.-010409-010410 - 2014Supreme Court20 Nov 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

…herefore, tower being an accessory of antenna, will be eligible for availing CENVAT credit under Rule 2(a)(A)(iii). Some more cases relied upon by the Assessee were as follows. (i) M/s. Annapurna Carbon Industries Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1976) 2 SCC 273. (ii) Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Bombay v. L.D. Bhave & Sons, 1981 SCC OnLine Bom 438. (ii) Mehra Brothers v. Joint Commercial Officer, (1991) 1 SCC 514. The Bombay High Court on examination held these decisions not to be applicable to the present case. 9.17 The Bombay High Court then considered the contentions…

Shree Cement Limited, Beawar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 152/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT

Section 115JSection 250Section 32(1)(ii)Section 80Section 80I

…n Union of India vs. Filip Tiago De Gama of Vedem Vasco De Gama, AIR 1990 SC 981 and Padma Sundara Rao (Decd) & Ors. vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. (2002) 176 CTR (SC) 104 : 2002 (3) SCC 533. 15. In D. R. Venkatachalam vs. Deputy Transport Commissioner (1977) 2 SCC 273 it was observed that courts must avoid the danger of a priori determination of the meaning of a provision based on their own preconceived notions of ideological structure or scheme into which the provision to be interpreted is somewhat fitted. They are not entitled to usurp legislative function under the disguise of interpretation. 16. While inter…

Zintec Software Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-17(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1690/HYD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Zintec Software (P) Ltd, Vs. Dy. C.I.T. Hyderabad Circle 17(2) Pan:Aaaczi110H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.A Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 16/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/08/2022 Order Per Laliet Kumar, J.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 6.6.2018 Of The Learned Cit (A)-5, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2011-12. 2. The Legal Grounds Raised By The Assessee Before Us Are As Under: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Failed To Appreciate That The Time Limitation Laid Down Under Section 154(7) Applies Only To Amendment Of Any "Order Passed" Referred To In Section 154(1)(A) & Not To Amendment Of Any Intimation Or Deemed Intimation Under Sub-Section (1) Of Section 143(1) Referred To In Section 154(1) (B) And, Therefore, Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Stating That The Rectification Application Is Beyond The Date Of Limitation. 2. Without Prejudice To Ground No. 1, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Not Justified In Not Adjudicating On The Ground Of Page 1 Of 11

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT(DR)

Section 115JSection 116Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(1)Section 154(1)(a)Section 154(7)Section 200A

…ITA No 1690 of 2018 Zintec Software P Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2011-12 Zintec Software (P) Ltd, Vs. Dy. C.I.T. Hyderabad Circle 17(2) PAN:AAACZI110H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.A Revenue by: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 16/08/2022 Date of pronouncement: 17/08/2022 ORDER Per Laliet Kumar, J.M This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 6.6.2018 of the le…

Jhansi Development Authority, Jhansi vs. ACIT Circle-4, Agra

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 149/AGR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

…etation are when the Court looks at both the literal language as well as the purpose or object of the statute in order to better determine what the words used by the draftsman of legislation mean. In D.R. Venkatachalam v. Deputy Transport Commissioner, (1977) 2 SCC 273, an early instance of this is found in the concurring judgment of Beg, J. The learned Judge put it rather well when he said: “It is, however, becoming increasingly fashionable to start with some theory of what is basic to a provision or a chapter or in a statute or even to our Constitution in order to interpret and determine the meaning of a partic…

ACIT Circle-4, Agra vs. Jhansi Development Authority, Jhansi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 355/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

…etation are when the Court looks at both the literal language as well as the purpose or object of the statute in order to better determine what the words used by the draftsman of legislation mean. In D.R. Venkatachalam v. Deputy Transport Commissioner, (1977) 2 SCC 273, an early instance of this is found in the concurring judgment of Beg, J. The learned Judge put it rather well when he said: “It is, however, becoming increasingly fashionable to start with some theory of what is basic to a provision or a chapter or in a statute or even to our Constitution in order to interpret and determine the meaning of a partic…

Jhasi Development Authority, Jhansi vs. Dy. C.I.T., Circle-4, Agra

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 256/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

…etation are when the Court looks at both the literal language as well as the purpose or object of the statute in order to better determine what the words used by the draftsman of legislation mean. In D.R. Venkatachalam v. Deputy Transport Commissioner, (1977) 2 SCC 273, an early instance of this is found in the concurring judgment of Beg, J. The learned Judge put it rather well when he said: “It is, however, becoming increasingly fashionable to start with some theory of what is basic to a provision or a chapter or in a statute or even to our Constitution in order to interpret and determine the meaning of a partic…