Supt of Taxes 172 ITR 42 (SC) (v) C F Sundaram (163 ITR 662) (vi) Narayan Row v. Model Mills

64 ITR 67Supreme Court of India1967#25405 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(x)

Judgments citing Supt of Taxes 172 ITR 42 (SC) (v) C F Sundaram (163 ITR 662) (vi) Narayan Row v. Model Mills

Dilip Kantilal Kubavat, Porbandar vs. ITO WD 2(3), Porbandar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 522/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.522/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year :2016-17 Dilip Kantilal Kubavat Ito बनाम/ Prop. Vijay Dairy Farm, Ward 2 (3), Vs Near Ramdhun S V P Road, Porbandar 360575 Porbandar - 360575 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Azfpk8009B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 09/09/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14 /10/2025 आदेश/Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 21.03.2025, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Here-In-After Referred To As “The Act”) Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised Multiple Grounds Of Appeal. However, The Solitary Grievance Of The Assessee Is That The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Not To Consider The Basic Fact That The Assessee Has Gifted The Property To His Sister In Law (Younger Brother'S Wife) That Is, To A Relative For A Consideration Dilip Kantilal Kubavat

For Appellant: Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

…er provisions of the Act. (i) OCM v/s CIT (138 ITR 689) (ii) Depchand v/s CIT (145 ITR 676) Dilip Kantilal Kubavat (iii) CST v/s Auriya 167 ITR (vi) Salonah v/s Supt of Taxes 172 ITR 42 (SC) (v) C F Sundaram (163 ITR 662) (vi) Narayan Row v/s Model Mills (64 ITR 67) (SC) (vii) Vallabh v/s Union of India (UOI) (155 ITR 560)(SC) Therefore, a combined reading of the above decisions of the Hon'ble courts leads to a conclusion that if an assessee is entitled to the benefit or relief, then, he / she cannot be denied for the reasons that he /she failed to claim it, and excess tax recovered from the assessee by the…

M/S. Shivamm Industries, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Dismissed

ITA 393/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.393/Pun/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S.Shivamm Industries, The Dy.Commissioner Of Plot 76, Arihant Heights, Sector Vs Income Tax, Circle-8, No.25, Pradhikaran Nigdi, Pune. Pune – 411044. Pan: Aaefs 0458 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 15/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26/05/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee I.E. Shivamm Industries For A.Y. 2013-14 Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Of Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Dated 21.03.2023 Emanating From Assessing Officer’S Order Under Section 154 Of The Act Dated 22.03.2021. The Ground Of Appeal Are As Under : “1. The Order Dated 21/03/2023 Bearing No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1051048828[L] Passed Under Section 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 By The Hon’Ble Cit[Appeals], National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Is Excessive, M/S.Shivamm Industries [A]

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36

…on the issue of delayed payment of employee’s contribution towards ESI/PF was already existing on the date of rectification order. Hence, the AO was right in invoking section 154 of the Act. The Hon’ble SC in the case of CIT Vs Model Mills Nagpur Ltd. [1967] 64 ITR 67 (SC) has already held that rectification application can be moved to give effect to the law laid down by Higher Court , in that case the Hon’ble Bombay High Court had held that levy of tax on excess dividend was illegal in the case of some other assessee Katau Spinning Mills , the assessee Model Mills moved an application for rectification based on…

The Seva Vikas Co-Op Bank Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 8, Pune

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

ITA 1565/PUN/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jul 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri N.C. LahotiFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 40

…ssed by the Assessing Officer. It is not necessary that an order passed by the Assessing Officer should contain a specific reference to the section. In this regard, reference can be made to the decision of Narayana Row (SAL) Vs. Model Mills, Nagpur (1967) 64 ITR 67 (SC). Needless to say that the labelling of an order does not always decide the question of the validity, an order can be upheld or valid if there is a statutory provision to which it can be validly attributed and more importantly, the word “order” in the expression “from the date of order sought to be amended” finding place in the provisions of…