What is Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain authority for?

Section 144C(4) uses a non-obstante clause to expedite the final assessment order, requiring the Assessing Officer to pass it immediately upon acceptance or lack of objection to the TPO's order, irrespective of broader time limits under Section 153.

How many judgments cite Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain?

147 judgments on BharatTax cite Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain (259 ITR 449), spanning 2009 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 153, Section 144C, Section 92CA, Section 144C(13), Section 153(2A), Section 153(3).

Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain (259 ITR 449)

M/S. Castlewick Fze, Dubai vs. ACIT, International Taxation, Circle-1(1), Chennai

ITA 459/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 148Section 201Section 201(1)Section 234ASection 9(1)(vii)

…use covering items of income, wherever arising, not dealt with in the foregoing Articles of the Treaty. 7.3.4 It is a settled principle that a clash is to be avoided while interpreting the provisions of a law or Treaty. In CIT V Hindustan Bulk Carriers (2003) 259 ITR 449, the Hon'ble Apex Court, referring to its earlier decisions on the approach to be followed in case of conflicting provisions, held as under at para 28 thereof :- 66 The court must ascertain the intention of the Legislature by directing its attention not merely to the clauses to be construed but to the entire statute; it must compare the clause wi…

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 237/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

…IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.234 to 237/Bang/2020 Assessment Year : 2008-09 to 2011-12 M/s. Eagle Traders and Logistics, Vs. DCIT, 126/18, 1st Cross, Nehru Colony, Central Circle –2(3), Bellary – 583 101. Bangalore. PAN :AACFE 4265 D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Prashanth G S, CA Revenue by : Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 06.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 ORDER Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member : All these ITA Nos. 234, 235,…

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 236/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

…IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.234 to 237/Bang/2020 Assessment Year : 2008-09 to 2011-12 M/s. Eagle Traders and Logistics, Vs. DCIT, 126/18, 1st Cross, Nehru Colony, Central Circle –2(3), Bellary – 583 101. Bangalore. PAN :AACFE 4265 D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Prashanth G S, CA Revenue by : Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 06.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 ORDER Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member : All these ITA Nos. 234, 235,…

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

ITA 235/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

…IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.234 to 237/Bang/2020 Assessment Year: 2008-09 to 2011-12 M/s. Eagle Traders and Logistics, Vs. DCIT, 126/18, 1st Cross, Nehru Colony, Central Circle –2(3), Bellary - 583 101. Bangalore. PAN :AACFE 4265 D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Prashanth G S, CA Revenue by : Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 06.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 29.05.2025 ORDER Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member : All these ITA Nos.234, 235, 236…

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in above terms

ITA 234/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G S, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(1)(a)Section 132(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 292B

…IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.234 to 237/Bang/2020 Assessment Year : 2008-09 to 2011-12 M/s. Eagle Traders and Logistics, Vs. DCIT, 126/18, 1st Cross, Nehru Colony, Central Circle –2(3), Bellary – 583 101. Bangalore. PAN :AACFE 4265 D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Prashanth G S, CA Revenue by : Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 06.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 ORDER Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member : All these ITA Nos. 234, 235,…

Income Tax Officer, Chandigarh vs. Sanbir Singh, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 455/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sahil Singla, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 148

…e of ‘ITO, Ward 1(3), Ghaziabad Vs Habitat Infrastructure Ltd.’ vi) Decision of the ITAT Kolkata Bench, in ITA No.428/Kol/2012 in the case of ‘ACIT Vs Sri Rakesh Bhartia’. vii) ‘Anjum M.H. Ghaswala’, 252 ITR 1 (S.C.) viii) ‘CIT Vs Hindustan Bulk Carriers’, 259 ITR 449 16. The ld. CIT(A), in para 7.3(iv) has taken cognizance of the facts that in the affidavit and the bank statement filed, Smt. Amarjit Kaur has clearly stated that these funds ITA 455/CHD/2023 & C.O. 2/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2018-19 20 were advanced to the appellant from OD facility with Kotak Mahindra Bank vide Account No.565044015115. In para 7.3(…

Hospira Healthcare India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

ITA 469/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.469/Chny/2017 िनधा<रण वष< /Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Hospira Healthcare India The Dy. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax, Sri-Nivas, New No.86 (Old No.89), Corporate Circle-2(2), Gn Chetty Road, T Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan: Aaabco 2190F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, C.A Jkथ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Jagadish, A.M : Aforesaid Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Passed By The Dcit, Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13, In Pursuance Of The Directions Issued By The Dispute Resolution Panel, Bengalore (Hereinafter ‘Drp’) Vide Directions Dated 09.11.2016. :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, C.A JKFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 143(3)

…rpreted in such a manner as to make it workable rather than redundant. This principle is expressed in the latin maxim “utres magis valeat quam pereat”. Explaining this principle, Hon’ble Supreme Court has, in the case of CIT Vs Hindustan Bulk Carriers [(2003) 259 ITR 449 (SC)], has observed that “A construction which reduces the statute to a futility has to be avoided” and that “A statute or any enacting provision therein must be so construed as to make it effective and operative on the principle expressed in maxim utres magis valeat quam pereat i.e., a liberal construction should be put upon written instruments,…

Radha Sharan Goswami, Bhopal vs. DDIT, CPC, Banglore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 527/IND/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniradha Sharan Goswami Ddit, Cpc B-18, Industrial Area Govindpura Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adzpg1806E Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21.05.2024

Section 143(1)Section 154

…scretionary as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anjuman H Ghaswala reported in 252 ITR 1 and also the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers Page 4 of 6 ITANo.527/Ind/2023 Radha Sharan Goswami reported in 259 ITR 449. Accordingly, this ground of appeal stands PARTLY ALLOWED. Ap 5.3 Ground no 1 Ground no 1 is general in nature and need not be adjudicated upon. 5.4 Ground no 6 in this ground the appellant has craved leave to add or delete all or any of the grounds before or at the time of hearing. No such option was exercised by the appellant during the appella…

Maharashtra Feeds P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1254/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR

Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 234ASection 234CSection 243CSection 245CSection 245DSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)

…us, interest under s. 234B is chargeable till the date of order of the Settlement Commission under s. 245D(1) i.e., admission of the case on the returned income plus the additional income. This preposition was also laid down in CIT vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers 259 ITR 449 (SC), wherein it was held that interest u/s 2344, 234B and 234C will be on the consolidated amount of income disclosed before the I.T. authorities and other undisclosed income, which is for the first time disclosed before the Commission. It is to be noted that Sec. 234B(4) envisages increase or reduction of interest, if the amount on which the i…

Maharashtra Feeds P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1253/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR

Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 234ASection 234CSection 243CSection 245CSection 245DSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)

…us, interest under s. 234B is chargeable till the date of order of the Settlement Commission under s. 245D(1) i.e., admission of the case on the returned income plus the additional income. This preposition was also laid down in CIT vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers 259 ITR 449 (SC), wherein it was held that interest u/s 2344, 234B and 234C will be on the consolidated amount of income disclosed before the I.T. authorities and other undisclosed income, which is for the first time disclosed before the Commission. It is to be noted that Sec. 234B(4) envisages increase or reduction of interest, if the amount on which the i…

Rama Rao Kotha, Kakinada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kakinada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Rama Rao Kotha Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.7-99, Near Indira Hospital Ward-2 Gokarakondavari Street Kakinada Korukonda East Godavari Dist. [Pan : Bpipk0075H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.Prabhakara Murthy, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar Aves, DR

Section 144Section 234BSection 250Section 44A

…R, charging of interest is consequential and interest is mandatory and not discretionary as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Anjuman H Ghaswala (252 ITR 1) and also the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers (259 ITR 449). Therefore, I direct the AO to restrict the charging of interest on the profit estimated @6% on gross turnover. Hence, the ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed. 12. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 7 I.T.A. No.1/Viz/2023, A.Y.2017-18 Shri Rama Rao Kotha, Kakinada Order pronounced in the open court on 29th Au…

Chand Monammad, Ajmer vs. ITO, Ward 1(3), Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 340/JPR/2022[2012-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Aug 2023AY 2012-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nikhlesh Kataria, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl.CIT

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…GOANo. 2 is dismissed. 7.4 GOA No. 3: Charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B. Interest u/s 234A and 234B is mandatory and not discretionary as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anjum M.H. Ghaswala in 252 ITR 1 and CIT Vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers in 259 ITR 449. For the purpose of statistics, this Ground of Appeal is hereby dismissed. 7.5 GOA No. 4: Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c). This GOA is premature as penalty u/s 271(1)(c) has not yet been levied and only notice has been issued. Even otherwise penalty proceedings are separate from assessmentproceedings. Hence, this GOA No. 4 is dismissed. 8. In v…

Dsob Class of 64 Charitable Trust, Delhi vs. DCIT, CPC, Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms stated above

ITA 1417/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 250

…ot 5 DSOB Class of 64 Charitable Trusts Vs. DCIT, CPC discretionary as held by the Hon’bie Supreme Court in the case of Anjuman H Ghaswala reported in 252 ITR 1 and also the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers reported in 259 ITR 449. Accordingly, this ground of appeal stands DISMISSED.” 4. Aggrieved against the order of the learned CIT(Appeals), now the assessee is in before this Tribunal. 5. Learned counsel for the assessee vehemently argued that the authorities below were not correct in sustaining the addition. Learned counsel submitted that the addition was made on ac…

Paramina Earth Technologies Inc., Vijayawada vs. DCIT, (International Taxation), Visakhapatnam

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 540/VIZ/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.539/Viz/2017 & 540/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2013-14 &2014-15) M/S Paramina Earth Technologies Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Inc.,Phillippines Income Tax Rep. By M/S Teknomin Construction (International Taxation) Limited, Flat No.F2, Ram’S Vsr Visakhapatnam Apartment, Mogalrajpuram Vijayawada [Pan :Aagcp6215P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri.I.Kamasastry, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Smt.U.Minichandran,Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2020 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri.I.KamaSastry, ARFor Respondent: Smt.U.MiniChandran,DR

Section 9(1)(vii)

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणमपीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्रीिी. दुगााराि,न्याधयकसदस्यएिंश्रीधड.एस. सुन्दरधसंह, लेखासदस्यकेसमक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.539/Viz/2017 & 540/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2013-14 &2014-15) M/s Paramina Earth Technologies Vs. Dy.Commissioner of Inc.,Phillippines Income Tax Rep. by M/s Teknomin Construction (International Taxation) Limited, Flat No.F2, Ram’s VSR Visakhapatnam Apartment, Mogalrajpuram Vijayawada [PAN :AAGCP6215P] (अपी…

Paramina Earth Technologies Inc., Vijayawada vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Visakhapatnam

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 539/VIZ/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.539/Viz/2017 & 540/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2013-14 &2014-15) M/S Paramina Earth Technologies Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Inc.,Phillippines Income Tax Rep. By M/S Teknomin Construction (International Taxation) Limited, Flat No.F2, Ram’S Vsr Visakhapatnam Apartment, Mogalrajpuram Vijayawada [Pan :Aagcp6215P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri.I.Kamasastry, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Smt.U.Minichandran,Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2020 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri.I.KamaSastry, ARFor Respondent: Smt.U.MiniChandran,DR

Section 9(1)(vii)

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणमपीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्रीिी. दुगााराि,न्याधयकसदस्यएिंश्रीधड.एस. सुन्दरधसंह, लेखासदस्यकेसमक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.539/Viz/2017 & 540/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Years:2013-14 &2014-15) M/s Paramina Earth Technologies Vs. Dy.Commissioner of Inc.,Phillippines Income Tax Rep. by M/s Teknomin Construction (International Taxation) Limited, Flat No.F2, Ram’s VSR Visakhapatnam Apartment, Mogalrajpuram Vijayawada [PAN :AAGCP6215P] (अपी…

Iss Shipping India Pvt. Ltd., (As Agent for Maersk Tankers Singapore Pte. Ltd., Singapore), Navi Mumbai vs. Dy. Commr. of Income Tax ( International Taxation), Rajkot

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 430/RJT/2018[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Nov 2019AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-D.R

Section 172(3)Section 172(4)

…patently absurd. 9. That takes us to the question as to what should the judicial authorities like this Tribunal to do when faced with such a situation. We find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers [2003] 259 ITR 449/126 Taxman 321, wherein it is observed that, "a construction which reduces the statute to a futility has to be avoided" and that "a statute or any enacting provision therein must be so construed as to make it effective and operative on the principle expressed in maxim ut res magis valeat quam pereat i.e., a liberal construction should be put upon…

Iss Shipping India Pvt. Ltd., (As Agent for Maersk Tankers Singapore Pte. Ltd., Singapore), Navi Mumbai vs. Dy. Commr. of Income Tax ( International Taxation), Rajkot

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 429/RJT/2018[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Nov 2019AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-D.R

Section 172(3)Section 172(4)

…patently absurd. 9. That takes us to the question as to what should the judicial authorities like this Tribunal to do when faced with such a situation. We find guidance from Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers [2003] 259 ITR 449/126 Taxman 321, wherein it is observed that, "a construction which reduces the statute to a futility has to be avoided" and that "a statute or any enacting provision therein must be so construed as to make it effective and operative on the principle expressed in maxim ut res magis valeat quam pereat i.e., a liberal construction should be put upon…

Vinca Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 11(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6070/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Vinca Developers Private Limited, Assistant Commissioner Of Unit No. 116, First Floor, Income Tax, Circle 11(3)(2), Rehab Building No. 4, “ Akruti Room No. 427, Aayakar Annex” , Road No. 7, Marol Midc, Vs. Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Andheri (East), Mubmai - 400020 Mumbai - 400093 Pan: Aaccv8042J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Viral Doshi (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Manish Kumar Singh (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 16/04/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 12/07/2019

For Appellant: Shri Viral Doshi (AR)For Respondent: Shri Manish Kumar Singh (DR)

Section 144Section 271(1)(C)Section 92Section 92A(1)Section 92A(2)Section 92A(2)(c)

…erpreted in such a manner as to make it workable rather than redundant. This principle is expressed in the latin maxim "ut res magis valeat quam pereat. Explaining this principle, Hon'ble Supreme Court has, in the case of CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers [2003] 259 ITR 449/126 Taxman 321 (SC), has observed that "A construction which reduces the statute to a futility has to be avoided" and that "A statute or any enacting provision therein must be so construed as to make it effective and operative on the principle expressed in maxim utres magis valeat quam pereat i.e., a liberal construction should be put upon writte…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) Circle-1(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Ibm India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1306/BANG/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Vandana Sagar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

…ted in such a way as to avoid conflict between the various provisions and referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers IT(IT)A Nos.1288, 1291, 1294, 1297, 1300, 1303 & 1306/Bang/2017 Page 16 of 20 (2003) 259 ITR 449. The Tribunal referred to decision of Hon’ble Bombay ITAT in the case of BNB Paribas SA V DCIT (2013) Tax Corp (AT) 32700, which dealt with identical clause in DTAA between India-UAE which is similar to Article 24(1) of DTAA, wherein the Mumbai ITAT held that the purpose of Article 25(1) of the India-UAE DTAA which is similar to Article 24(1) of…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) Circle-1(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Ibm India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1303/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Vandana Sagar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

…ted in such a way as to avoid conflict between the various provisions and referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers IT(IT)A Nos.1288, 1291, 1294, 1297, 1300, 1303 & 1306/Bang/2017 Page 16 of 20 (2003) 259 ITR 449. The Tribunal referred to decision of Hon’ble Bombay ITAT in the case of BNB Paribas SA V DCIT (2013) Tax Corp (AT) 32700, which dealt with identical clause in DTAA between India-UAE which is similar to Article 24(1) of DTAA, wherein the Mumbai ITAT held that the purpose of Article 25(1) of the India-UAE DTAA which is similar to Article 24(1) of…

Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain

What is Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain

M/S. Castlewick Fze, Dubai vs. ACIT, International Taxation, Circle-1(1), Chennai

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

M/S. Eagle Traders & Logistics, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

Income Tax Officer, Chandigarh vs. Sanbir Singh, Chandigarh

Hospira Healthcare India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

Radha Sharan Goswami, Bhopal vs. DDIT, CPC, Banglore

Maharashtra Feeds P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

Maharashtra Feeds P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

Rama Rao Kotha, Kakinada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kakinada

Chand Monammad, Ajmer vs. ITO, Ward 1(3), Ajmer

Dsob Class of 64 Charitable Trust, Delhi vs. DCIT, CPC, Delhi

Paramina Earth Technologies Inc., Vijayawada vs. DCIT, (International Taxation), Visakhapatnam

Paramina Earth Technologies Inc., Vijayawada vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Visakhapatnam

Iss Shipping India Pvt. Ltd., (As Agent for Maersk Tankers Singapore Pte. Ltd., Singapore), Navi Mumbai vs. Dy. Commr. of Income Tax ( International Taxation), Rajkot

Iss Shipping India Pvt. Ltd., (As Agent for Maersk Tankers Singapore Pte. Ltd., Singapore), Navi Mumbai vs. Dy. Commr. of Income Tax ( International Taxation), Rajkot

Vinca Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 11(3)(2), Mumbai

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) Circle-1(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Ibm India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) Circle-1(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Ibm India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore