Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT

66 ITR 462Supreme Court of India1967#1940 most cited

What is Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT authority for?

The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal performs a judicial function under the Indian Income-tax Act, invested with authority to finally determine all questions of fact. When deciding an appeal, the Tribunal must consider all material facts with due care, record findings on all contentions, and maintain a judicial balance between the revenue and taxpayer claims. The power to condone delay by enacting section 5 of the Limitation Act of 1963 enables courts, including the Tribunal, to do substantial justice, with "sufficient cause" being an elastic expression.

59

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT · Udhavdas Kewalram 1967 SC · ITAT judicial function · Income Tax Appellate Tribunal fact finding · questions of fact finality · condonation of delay section 5 Limitation Act · sufficient cause · ITAT appellate powers · section 260A · judicial balance Tribunal

Sections most often in play

Section 12ASection 80G(5)Section 106Section 119Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)Section 12AASection 131Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 52(2)section 66section 119(1)section 106section 52pptpermanent account numbersection 80g(5)(iii)trccreditworthiness of the creditorsection 260section 260a

Judgments citing Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT

Bhutoria Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 7(4), Kolkata

ITA 2024/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A. No. 2024/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(1)Section 68

…so the Tribunal committed grave error in law in upsetting the judgment in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 9. In this connection he has drawn our attention to a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT [19671 66 ITR 462. In this judgment it is noticed that the Supreme Court as proposition of law held that the Tribunal must In deciding an appeal, consider with due care, all the material facts and record its finding on all the contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner in the light of the evidence and the relevant law. 10. We find considerable force of…

ITO, WD-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Tritium Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 16/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Kolkata.………......……….........…………..………….…................Appellant Vs. M/S. Tritium Commodities………..........….……...........…………..……………….…...……..…….......Respondent 7, Babulal Lane Kolkata – 700 007 [Pan : Aacct 8286 G] Appearances By: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Addl. Cit Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 6Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 28Th , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 15/10/2015, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Assessee Is A Company & Is In The Business Of Investment In Shares & Securities. For The Assessment Year 2012-13, It Filed Its Return Of Income On 27/09/2017, Disclosing Nil Income. It Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2008-09, On 22/10/2008, Declaring Total Loss Or Rs.14,726/-. The Assessment Order Was Passed U/S 147/143(3) Of The Act, On 24/06/2010. Thereafter The Ld. Cit(A), Passed An Order U/S 263 Of The Act, Setting Aside The Assessment Order Dt. 24/06/2010. The Assessing Officer Passed The Impugned Fresh Order In Pursuance To The Order U/S 263 Of The Act, Dt. 31/03/2014, Making An Addition Of The Share Application Money Of Rs.2.07 Crores U/S 68 Of The Act. Aggrieved The Assessee Carried The Matter In Appeal. The Ld. First Appellate Authority Deleted The Addition For The Reasons Given In His Order.

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147Section 250Section 263Section 68

…ng the judgment in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 12 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. Tritium Commodities 9. In this connection he has drawn our attention to a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT [19671 66 ITR 462. In this judgment it is noticed that the Supreme Court as proposition of law held that the Tribunal must In deciding an appeal, consider with due care, all the material facts and record its finding on all the contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner in the light of the evidence and the relevant law. 10. We find considerable force of…

DCIT, Cir.-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Jagannath Banwarilal Texofabs Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1762/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri A.L.Saini, Am]

Section 131Section 68

…so the Tribunal committed grave error in law in upsetting the judgment in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 9. In this connection he has drawn our attention to a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of UdhavdasKewalram v. CIT [19671 66 ITR 462. In this judgment it is noticed that the Supreme Court as proposition of law held that the Tribunal must In deciding an appeal, consider with due care, all the material facts and record its finding on all the contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner in the light of the evidence and the relevant law. 10. We find considerable force o…

ITO, Ward-12(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Splendour Villa Makers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1768/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1768/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-12(3), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Splendour Villa Makers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aahcs 9726 M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Mondal, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri M.D. Shah, AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…so the Tribunal committed grave error in law in upsetting the judgment in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 9. In this connection he has drawn our attention to a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT [19671 66 ITR 462. In this judgment it is noticed that the Supreme Court as proposition of law held that the Tribunal must In deciding an appeal, consider with due care, all the material facts and record its finding on all the contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner in the light of the evidence and the relevant law. 10. We find considerable force of…

Poonam Pandey, Ghaziabad vs. ACIT, Circle- 2, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 7660/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh

Section 144Section 271(1)(c)

…e that of law lies on the Revenue. The law is only applicable in the tax matters in the peculiar facts of the case since the application of law is with reference to the relevant facts of the particular case. However, as held in Udhavadas Kewalram v CIT (1967) 66 ITR 462, 464 (SC), by the Apex Court , it is for the income tax authorities to prove that a particular receipt is taxable. It was pointed out that in deciding whether an item of receipt is taxable as income, the Tribunal may consider the evidence in the light of the statements made by the assessee, his conduct and the “probabilities”, but in arriving at i…

Moti Adhesives P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-17(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3133/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292CSection 68

…bunal committed grave error in law in upsetting the judgment in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 9. In this connection, he has drawn our attention to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT [19671 66 ITR 462. In this judgment it is noticed that the Supreme Court as proposition of law held that the Tribunal must in deciding an appeal, consider with due care, all the material facts and record its finding on all the contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner in the light of the evidence and the relevant law. 10. We find considerable force of…

ITO, WD-6(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Wiz Tech Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1162/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jun 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 131Section 68

…so the Tribunal committed grave error in law in upsetting the judgment in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 9. In this connection he has drawn our attention to a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT [19671 66 ITR 462. In this judgment it is noticed that the Supreme Court as proposition of law held that the Tribunal must In deciding an appeal, consider with due care, all the material facts and record its finding on all the contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner in the light of the evidence and the relevant law. 10. We find considerable force of…

ITO, Ward - 3(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Chitravali Sales (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1258/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 68

…1 ITA No. 1258/Kol/2010 & CO No.116 of 2010 Chitravali Sales (P) Ltd. AY 2006-07 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri M. Balaganesh, AM & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A No. 1258/Kol/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Income-tax Officer, Wd-3(4), Kolkata. Vs. M/s. Chitravali Sales (P) Ltd. (PAN: AABCC2251R) (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.116/Kol/2010 In I.T.A No. 1258/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s. Chitravali Sales (P) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, Wd-3(4), Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 05.07.2016 Date of pronouncement: 10.08.2016 For t…

CIT vs. Titan Securities Ltd

ITA/263/2012HC Delhi28 Feb 2013

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 260ASection 68

…s reasons in support of the decision. The practice of recording a decision without reasons in support cannot but be severely deprecated”. The same Bench of three learned Judges reiterated the aforesaid observations in Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 in the following words: - “The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal performs a judicial function under the Indian Income-tax Act: it is invested with ITA 263/2012 Page 15 of 15 authority to determine finally all questions of fact. The Tribunal must, in deciding an appeal, consider with due care all the material facts an…

CIT vs. Titan Securities Ltd

ITA-263/2012HC Delhi28 Feb 2013
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 260ASection 68

…s reasons in support of the decision. The practice of recording a decision without reasons in support cannot but be severely deprecated”. The same Bench of three learned Judges reiterated the aforesaid observations in Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 in the following words: - “The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal performs a judicial function under the Indian Income-tax Act: it is invested with 2013:DHC:1122-DB ITA 263/2012 Page 15 of 15 authority to determine finally all questions of fact. The Tribunal must, in deciding an appeal, consider with due care all the…

Director of Income Tax vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission

ITA/1124/2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 12ASection 12LSection 260ASection 263

…ublic ret)enue and o.f the taxpalters, the Ti'tbunal musl nrcrrtrlrrrrt a ludrcial balance." ITA Nos 7 5412010. 17312010, 77 512010, 109212010. I l0l/20 10' l r03/2010. 110412010. rrr2/2010 & 1 124/2010 Pagc 17 of22 In (Jrlhat,elas l(evtalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 SC., the very satrte llettclr ol'llrlcc judges of the Supreme Court again observed as under' - "The Inconte-tax Appellale Tribunal per.'fornt,s tt lttdrctul firrrclrrttr under the Indtan Income-lax Acl: il rs rrtve.s'led v,rl/t crt,rlhot'tl.\t /rt cleterntine.ftnalllt all Eresfions of facl. T'he'frrbtmal, mtrsl, itr dectc{rtrg an appeal, constder…

Director of Income Tax vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission

ITA/775/2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 12ASection 12LSection 260ASection 263

…ublic ret)enue and o.f the taxpalters, the Ti'tbunal musl nrcrrtrlrrrrt a ludrcial balance." ITA Nos 7 5412010. 17312010, 77 512010, 109212010. I l0l/20 10' l r03/2010. 110412010. rrr2/2010 & 1 124/2010 Pagc 17 of22 In (Jrlhat,elas l(evtalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 SC., the very satrte llettclr ol'llrlcc judges of the Supreme Court again observed as under' - "The Inconte-tax Appellale Tribunal per.'fornt,s tt lttdrctul firrrclrrttr under the Indtan Income-lax Acl: il rs rrtve.s'led v,rl/t crt,rlhot'tl.\t /rt cleterntine.ftnalllt all Eresfions of facl. T'he'frrbtmal, mtrsl, itr dectc{rtrg an appeal, constder…

Director of Income Tax vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission

ITA/1112/2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 12ASection 12LSection 260ASection 263

…ublic ret)enue and o.f the taxpalters, the Ti'tbunal musl nrcrrtrlrrrrt a ludrcial balance." ITA Nos 7 5412010. 17312010, 77 512010, 109212010. I l0l/20 10' l r03/2010. 110412010. rrr2/2010 & 1 124/2010 Pagc 17 of22 In (Jrlhat,elas l(evtalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 SC., the very satrte llettclr ol'llrlcc judges of the Supreme Court again observed as under' - "The Inconte-tax Appellale Tribunal per.'fornt,s tt lttdrctul firrrclrrttr under the Indtan Income-lax Acl: il rs rrtve.s'led v,rl/t crt,rlhot'tl.\t /rt cleterntine.ftnalllt all Eresfions of facl. T'he'frrbtmal, mtrsl, itr dectc{rtrg an appeal, constder…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission

ITA-754/2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012
Section 12ASection 260ASection 263Section 80GSection 80G(5)(vi)

…axpayers, the Tribunal must maintain a judicial balance.” 2012:DHC:7652-DB ITA Nos.754/2010, 773/2010, 775/2010, 1092/2010, 1101/2010, 1103/2010, 1104/2010, 1112/2010 & 1124/2010 Page 18 of 22 In Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 SC, the very same Bench of three judges of the Supreme Court again observed as under: - “The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal performs a judicial function under the Indian Income-tax Act: it is invested with authority to determine finally all questions of fact. The Tribunal must, in deciding an appeal, consider with due care all the material f…

Director of Income Tax vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission

ITA - 1124 / 2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012
Section 12ASection 12LSection 260ASection 263

…d o.f the taxpalters, the Ti'tbunal musl nrcrrtrlrrrrt a ludrcial balance." ITA Nos 7 5412010. 17312010, 77 512010, 109212010. I l0l/20 10' l r03/2010. 110412010. rrr2/2010 & 1 124/2010 Pagc 17 of22 2012:DHC:7826-DB In (Jrlhat,elas l(evtalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 SC., the very satrte llettclr ol'llrlcc judges of the Supreme Court again observed as under' - "The Inconte-tax Appellale Tribunal per.'fornt,s tt lttdrctul firrrclrrttr under the Indtan Income-lax Acl: il rs rrtve.s'led v,rl/t crt,rlhot'tl.\t /rt cleterntine.ftnalllt all Eresfions of facl. T'he'frrbtmal, mtrsl, itr dectc{rtrg an appeal, constder…

Director of Income Tax vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission

ITA - 1104 / 2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012
Section 12ASection 12LSection 260ASection 263

…d o.f the taxpalters, the Ti'tbunal musl nrcrrtrlrrrrt a ludrcial balance." ITA Nos 7 5412010. 17312010, 77 512010, 109212010. I l0l/20 10' l r03/2010. 110412010. rrr2/2010 & 1 124/2010 Pagc 17 of22 2012:DHC:7826-DB In (Jrlhat,elas l(evtalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 SC., the very satrte llettclr ol'llrlcc judges of the Supreme Court again observed as under' - "The Inconte-tax Appellale Tribunal per.'fornt,s tt lttdrctul firrrclrrttr under the Indtan Income-lax Acl: il rs rrtve.s'led v,rl/t crt,rlhot'tl.\t /rt cleterntine.ftnalllt all Eresfions of facl. T'he'frrbtmal, mtrsl, itr dectc{rtrg an appeal, constder…

Director of Income Tax vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission

ITA - 1092 / 2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012
Section 12ASection 12LSection 260ASection 263

…d o.f the taxpalters, the Ti'tbunal musl nrcrrtrlrrrrt a ludrcial balance." ITA Nos 7 5412010. 17312010, 77 512010, 109212010. I l0l/20 10' l r03/2010. 110412010. rrr2/2010 & 1 124/2010 Pagc 17 of22 2012:DHC:7826-DB In (Jrlhat,elas l(evtalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 SC., the very satrte llettclr ol'llrlcc judges of the Supreme Court again observed as under' - "The Inconte-tax Appellale Tribunal per.'fornt,s tt lttdrctul firrrclrrttr under the Indtan Income-lax Acl: il rs rrtve.s'led v,rl/t crt,rlhot'tl.\t /rt cleterntine.ftnalllt all Eresfions of facl. T'he'frrbtmal, mtrsl, itr dectc{rtrg an appeal, constder…

Director of Income Tax vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission

ITA - 754 / 2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012
Section 12ASection 260ASection 263Section 80GSection 80G(5)(vi)

…axpayers, the Tribunal must maintain a judicial balance.” 2012:DHC:7652-DB ITA Nos.754/2010, 773/2010, 775/2010, 1092/2010, 1101/2010, 1103/2010, 1104/2010, 1112/2010 & 1124/2010 Page 18 of 22 In Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 SC, the very same Bench of three judges of the Supreme Court again observed as under: - “The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal performs a judicial function under the Indian Income-tax Act: it is invested with authority to determine finally all questions of fact. The Tribunal must, in deciding an appeal, consider with due care all the material f…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission

ITA/754/2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012
Section 12ASection 260ASection 263Section 80GSection 80G(5)(vi)

…axpayers, the Tribunal must maintain a judicial balance.” 2012:DHC:7652-DB ITA Nos.754/2010, 773/2010, 775/2010, 1092/2010, 1101/2010, 1103/2010, 1104/2010, 1112/2010 & 1124/2010 Page 18 of 22 In Udhavdas Kewalram v. CIT, (1967) 66 ITR 462 SC, the very same Bench of three judges of the Supreme Court again observed as under: - “The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal performs a judicial function under the Indian Income-tax Act: it is invested with authority to determine finally all questions of fact. The Tribunal must, in deciding an appeal, consider with due care all the material f…