UCO Bank v. CIT

237 ITR 889Supreme Court of India1999#140 most cited

What is UCO Bank v. CIT authority for?

CBDT circulars and instructions, while not binding on courts or assessees, are strictly binding on income-tax departmental authorities, who cannot act in contravention of them.

486

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

UCO Bank v. CIT · 237 ITR 889 · Supreme Court · CBDT circulars binding on department · instructions to tax authorities · section 119 · income tax authorities bound by circulars · contravention of instructions · 143(2) notices · scope of scrutiny

Also reported as

104 Taxmann 547

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 148Section 132Section 250Section 143(2)Section 147Section 115BBE

Issues it is cited on

section 119(1)installation pesection 5(8)section 119(2)(a)dependent agent peagency peservice pefunctional analysisclosely held companysection 150far analysissection 119

Judgments citing UCO Bank v. CIT

KRISHNA CONSTRUCTIONS,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1330/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.1330/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Krishna Constructions The Income Tax Officer, Nirmal. Telangana. Ward-1, Vs. Pin – 504 106. Nirmal – 504 106. Pan Aapfk1280K Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : Sri D Prabhakar Reddy, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar,Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08.04.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

For Appellant: Sri D Prabhakar Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar,Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…aced on the following judicial precedents, wherein it has been consistently held that the circulars and instructions issued by the CBDT in exercise of its powers u/s.119 of the Act are binding on the AO. 89. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 (SC) noted as under:- “…….What is the status of these circulars ? Section 119(1) of the Act provides that. "The Board may, from time to time, issue such orders, instructions and directions to other income-tax authorities as it may deem fit for the proper administration of this Act, and such authorities and all other persons employed in the execu…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue’s bearing ITA No

ITA 2398/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 112Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234DSection 250

…T circular has given a concession to the assessee which cannot be denied since circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the Department. To this effect, assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank vs. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 (SSC). “13.1 It is also important to note about the binding nature of CBDT circular on the Income-tax Authorities for which gainful guidance is taken from the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT u. Hero Cycles [1997] 228 ITR 463 (SC) wherein it was held that circulars bind the ITO but will not bind the appellate authority or the…

TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-8(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue’s bearing ITA No

ITA 1450/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 112Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234DSection 250

…T circular has given a concession to the assessee which cannot be denied since circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the Department. To this effect, assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank vs. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 (SSC). “13.1 It is also important to note about the binding nature of CBDT circular on the Income-tax Authorities for which gainful guidance is taken from the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT u. Hero Cycles [1997] 228 ITR 463 (SC) wherein it was held that circulars bind the ITO but will not bind the appellate authority or the…

BR ASSOCIATES ,UTTARAKAHAND vs. ACIT , RISHIKESH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the assessment order is quashed

ITA 175/DDN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year : 2016-17] M/S. B R Associates Vs Acit Jolly Grant, Circle-1(4)(1) Bhaniyawala, Dehradun, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand-248140 Uttarakhand-249201 Pan-Aaqfb6241E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Kanwal K.Juneja, Ca Revenue By Shri A.S.Rana, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.02.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.07.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Dehradun/10296/2018-19 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 28.12.2018 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed Its Return Of Income On 08.10.2016 Declaring Total Income At Inr 46,02,250/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & The Notice Was Issued By Ito, Ward-1(2), Dehradun Thereafter, The Case Was Transferred To Dcit, Circle-1(1)(1), Dehradun. Thereafter, Various Notices Were Issued & Replies Were Filed By The Assessee. After Considering The Submissions, Total Income Was Assessed At Inr 1,93,96,755/- By Making Addition Of Inr 55.00 Lakhs Towards Bogus Advances & Inr 14,13,600/- As Deemed Income & Further Disallowance Of Expenses Of Inr 78,80,905/- Was Made.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

…ere can be no escape from the same for justifying assumption of jurisdiction by an officer other than that prescribed in the said instruction. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the Judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank Vs. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC) and Commissioner of Customs etc. Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. &Anr. (2004) 267 ITR 272 (SC). In the aforesaid judgments it was held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that though the CBDT/CBEC circulars are not binding on court or the assessee, but the departmental authorities are bound by them and cannot act in contravention of the same. Also, su…

DCIT, DELHI vs. ALAKA MARS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 8517/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…ere can be no escape from the same for justifying assumption of jurisdiction by an officer other than that prescribed in the said instruction. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank Vs. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC) and Commissioner of Customs etc. Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Anr. (2004) 267 ITR 272 (SC). In the aforesaid judgments it was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that though the CBDT/CBEC circulars are not binding on court or the assessee, but the departmental authorities are bound by them and cannot act in contravention of the same. Also, s…

NISAR EBRAHIM OOKABHOY ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 16(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6638/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21
Section 143(1)Section 199Section 205

…it, theRevenue cannot both refuse credit and simultaneously demand\nthe same sum from the deductee. Section 205, it was held, places a complete\nembargo on such recovery.\n17. Support was also drawn from the Supreme Court's rulings in UCO Bank v.\nCIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 and Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003]\n263 ITR 706, affirming that CBDT circulars and instructions are binding on the\nRevenue. It was contended that the learned CIT(A) erred in reducing the binding\ninstructions of CBDT into a dead letter by treating Form 26AS as the sole\ngoverning factor.\n18. We have carefully considered the rival…

AADARSH SURANA, CHENNAI,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1840/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri. R.Venkata Raman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 47Section 68

…aced on the following judicial precedents, wherein it has been consistently held that the circulars and instructions issued by the CBDT in exercise of its powers u/s.119 of the Act are binding on the AO. 89. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 (SC) noted as under: - "....What is the status of these circulars ? Section 119(1) of the Act provides that "The Board may, from time to time, issue orders, instructions and directions to other income-tax authorities as it may deem fit for the proper administration of this Act, and such authorities and all other persons employed in the execution…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, DELHI vs. RAKESH ARORA, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3610/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 69A

…the set aside and no substantial of law arises. The said Judgment relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs Vs Indian Oil Corporation and also the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank Vs CIT: 237 ITR 889. 13. Considering the above facts and circumstances and also the CBDT Circular and the Judicial Precedents, we hold that the Assessing Officer can widen the scope of scrutiny even the case is selected for limited scrutiny under CASS, however, the condition precedent for such widening of the scope is that the Assessing Officer has to seek prior app…

DCIT, MUMBAI vs. CHANDMIYA MIYAJAN QURESHI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 5172/MUM/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2025

Bench: SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil R. PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri Virqabhadra Mahajan, (SR. DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 40A(3)

…DT Circulars. It is a settled position in law that a Circular issued by the CBDT cannot impose additional condition to the Act and/or Rules adverse to an assessee. Respectfully relied on the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in UCO Bank v. CIT reported in [1999] 237 ITR 889/104 Taxman 547 (SC), held that “12. We do not see any inconsistency or contradiction between the circular so issued and section 145. In fact, the circular clarifies the way in which these amounts are to be treated under the accounting practice followed by the lender. The circular, therefore, cannot be treated as contrary to section 145 or illegal…

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BENGALURU

ITA 940/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri M.V Prasad, CA & Shri KS Rajendra KumarFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT &
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 25Section 250Section 8

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE\nBEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND\nSHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA No. 939 & 940/Bang/2025\n Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2021-22\nM/s Sri Srinivasa Educational &\nCharitable Trust,\nNo.619/G, 36th Cross, 2nd Block,\nRajajinagar,\nBangalore – 560 010.\nVs.\nThe Dy. Commissioner of\nIncome Tax,\nCentral Circle – 2(3),\nBangalore.\nPAN – AAGCS 0925 B\nAPPELLANT RESPONDENT\nAssessee by : Shri M.V Prasad, CA & Shri KS Rajendra Kumar,\nIRS (Retired)\nRevenue by : Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT &\nShri Subramanian S, JCIT - (…

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

ITA 939/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Nov 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nShri M.V Prasad, CA & Shri KS Rajendra KumarFor Respondent: \nShri Muthu Shankar, CIT &
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 25Section 250Section 8

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \n‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE\nBEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND\nSHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA No. 939 & 940/Bang/2025\n Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2021-22\n\nM/s Sri Srinivasa Educational &\nCharitable Trust,\nNo.619/G, 36th Cross, 2nd Block,\nRajajinagar,\nBangalore – 560 010.\nPAN – AAGCS 0925 B\nAPPELLANT\n\nAssessee by :\nShri M.V Prasad, CA & Shri KS Rajendra Kumar,\nIRS (Retired)\nRevenue by :\nShri Muthu Shankar, CIT &\nShri Subramanian S, JCIT - (DRs)\nDate of hearing : 14.11.2025\nDate of Pronouncement : 26.11.2025\n\nVs.\n\nTh…

RAKSHIT ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3615/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Naveen Chandrarakshit Estates Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hsiidc Limited. Building, Vanijya Nikunj, Plot No. 11, Basement, J 2.1, Udhyogvihar, Phase-V, Sector 83, Gurgaon, Haryana Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Aagcr0135G Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Ramesh Chander, Adv Revenue By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/10/2025

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ere can be no escape from the same for justifying assumption of jurisdiction by an officer other than that prescribed in the said instruction. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the Judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank Vs. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC) and Commissioner of Customs etc. Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. &Anr. (2004) 267 ITR 272 (SC). In the aforesaid judgments it was held by the Hon’ble Apex Court that though the CBDT/CBEC circulars are not binding on court or the assessee, but the departmental authorities are bound by them and cannot act in contravention of the same. Also, su…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PARWANOO vs. JOGINDRA CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., VILLAGE-RAJGARH ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 120/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parveen Sharma, Advocate (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 43D

…e said to accrue therefrom until realized. He emphasized that the doctrine of “real income” governs such cases and that notional accrual of interest, when 3 recovery is uncertain or doubtful, cannot be subjected to tax. He placed reliance on UCO Bank v. CIT (237 ITR 889 SC), Godhra Electricity Co. (225 ITR 746 SC), and Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. (330 ITR 440 Del). 8. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the record. It is an admitted position that the assessee is a co-operative bank governed by the Reserve Bank of India’s Master Circular on Prudential Norms for Income Recognition and Asset…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 712/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

…3C\nwere struck down due to absence of incriminating material. This administrative\ninstructions are not binding on quasi-judicial authorities like the CIT(A). It is a\nsettled principle of law, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in UCO Bank v.\nCIT [(1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC)] (CLC 41-49), that CBDT circulars or instructions\ncannot override, supplement, or expand the scope of statutory provisions. Thus,\ntaking shelter of Instruction No. 1/2023 as enabling or empowering appellate\nauthorities to direct initiation of reassessment proceedings is a fundamental\nmisapplication of the Instruction, which neither autho…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 710/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

…ng material. This administrative instructions are not binding\n\n76\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Sapna Karnani\non quasi-judicial authorities like the CIT(A). It is a settled principle of law, as held\nby the Hon'ble Supreme Court in UCO Bank v. CIT [(1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC)]\n(CLC 41-49), that CBDT circulars or instructions cannot override, supplement, or\nexpand the scope of statutory provisions. Thus, taking shelter of Instruction No.\n1/2023 as enabling or empowering appellate authorities to direct initiation of\nreassessment proceedings is a fundamental misapplication of the Instruction,\nwhich neither auth…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 709/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

…3C\nwere struck down due to absence of incriminating material. This administrative\ninstructions are not binding on quasi-judicial authorities like the CIT(A). It is a\nsettled principle of law, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in UCO Bank v.\nCIT [(1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC)] (CLC 41-49), that CBDT circulars or instructions\ncannot override, supplement, or expand the scope of statutory provisions. Thus,\ntaking shelter of Instruction No. 1/2023 as enabling or empowering appellate\nauthorities to direct initiation of reassessment proceedings is a fundamental\nmisapplication of the Instruction, which neither autho…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. KARNANI SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 480/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 68

…3C\nwere struck down due to absence of incriminating material. This administrative\ninstructions are not binding on quasi-judicial authorities like the CIT(A). It is a\nsettled principle of law, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in UCO Bank v.\nCIT [(1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC)] (CLC 41-49), that CBDT circulars or instructions\ncannot override, supplement, or expand the scope of statutory provisions. Thus,\ntaking shelter of Instruction No. 1/2023 as enabling or empowering appellate\nauthorities to direct initiation of reassessment proceedings is a fundamental\nmisapplication of the Instruction, which neither autho…

SAURASHTRA GRAMIN BANK MANAGER (F & A), RAJKOT,RAJKOT vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I,, RAJKOT

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

ITA 37/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 37/Rjt/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Saurashtra Gramin Bank Vs. The Pr. Cit-1, Manager (F & A), Rajkot 1St Floor Wing 2, Lic Jeevan Prakash Building, Tagore Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aahas2116H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. A.D. Vyas, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

…er accounting standards and consistently upheld by courts. That is, various Courts and Tribunals have consistently allowed depreciation on valuation of securities held as stock-in-trade by banks. The Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC) – held that depreciation on securities held as stock-in-trade is allowable. The RBI guidelines for valuation are binding for banks, and such losses are deductible. The Hon`ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Bank of Baroda (2003) 262 ITR 334 (Bom HC), held that loss on valuation of securities held as stock-in-trade is deductible. The…

NAIK NAIK AND CO ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT -16(3), MUMBAI

In the result we hold that the assessee is entitled to credit of TDS to the extent deduction from its receipts is established on the basis of the contemporaneous material placed on record

ITA 2915/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 205Section 234BSection 234C

…aik and Co. Revenue cannot both refuse credit and simultaneously demand the same sum from the deductee. Section 205, it was held, places a complete embargo on such recovery. 17. Support was also drawn from the Supreme Court’s rulings in UCO Bank v. CIT [1999] 237 ITR 889 and Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706, affirming that CBDT circulars and instructions are binding on the Revenue. It was contended that the learned CIT(A) erred in reducing the binding instructions of CBDT into a dead letter by treating Form 26AS as the sole governing factor. 18. We have carefully considered the rival subm…

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1682/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar
Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

…on has not been withdrawn till date. It is t ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., law, as reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in as reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in UCO Bank v. CIT UCO Bank v. CIT (237 ITR 889) that CBDT circulars issued under section 119 of the that CBDT circulars issued under section 119 of the that CBDT circulars issued under section 119 of the Act are binding on the Revenue authorities so long as they are not Act are binding on the Revenue authorities so long as they are not Act are binding on the Revenue authorities so long as the…

Showing 1–20 of 486 · Page 1 of 25

...