Union of India and Others v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd.

55 ELT 433Supreme Court of India1991#1967 most cited

What is Union of India and Others v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. authority for?

A lower authority is bound to follow an order of a superior judicial authority, even if the order is not acceptable to the department and is subject to an appeal. The mere fact that an order is not accepted by the Department and is under appeal does not furnish grounds for not following it.

58

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Union of India vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. · 55 ELT 433 · binding effect of orders · appellate authority · departmental appeal · following superior court judgments · section 147 · section 148 · section 153A

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 147Section 144BSection 153ASection 153DSection 143(3)Section 144ASection 151A

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)(a)section 274(2)section 153(a)section 135asection 148bsection 94casus omissusviolation of natural justicesection 271aaasection 38section 132(4a)faceless assessment scheme

Judgments citing Union of India and Others v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd.

DCIT, Circle - 1, Thane vs. Everest Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal

ITA 1422/MUM/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-1, Thane, M/S Everest Industries Room No. 22, B-Wing, 6Th Floor, Limited, Ashar It Park, Wagle Industrial Vs. G-1, A-32, Genesis Mohan Estate, Coop. Industries, Mathura Thane(W)-400604. Road, New Delhi-110044. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Yogesh Thar/Shri Chaitanya Joshi, Ar : Revenue By Ms. Richa Gulati, Dr & Mr. Ashok Singh, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 18/01/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 20/01/2023

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/Shri Chaitanya

…ant to state that the Hon’ ble Supreme e Hon’ ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs., Kamlakshi Finance Court in the case of Union of India vs., Kamlakshi Finance Court in the case of Union of India vs., Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd., [1991] 55 ELT 433 (SC) has held that ‘ mere Corporation Ltd., [1991] 55 ELT 433 (SC) has held that ‘ mere Corporation Ltd., [1991] 55 ELT 433 (SC) has held that ‘ mere fact that the order of the appellate authority is not fact that the order of the appellate authority is not fact that the order of the appellate authority is not M/s Everest Industries Limited M/s E…

Everest Industrial Ltd., Noida vs. Dy CIT Circle-1, Thane

ITA 7792/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap, D.R
Section 43(1)

…est Industries Ltd. an appeal before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay which is pending for adjudication. In this connection, it is relevant to state that the Hon’ ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs., Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd., [1991] 55 ELT 433 (SC) has held that ‘ mere fact that the order of the appellate authority is not “acceptable” to the Department and is the subject matter of an appeal can furnish no ground for not following it unless its operation has been suspended by a competent court. We find that since the order of the Special Bench of the Tribunal is still holds the field and…

DCIT Circle- 1, Thane vs. M/S Everest Industries Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly

ITA 554/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh Chaitanya Joshi &For Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 43B

…./2020 Everest Industries Limited, Noida. U.P. High Court of Bombay which is pending for adjudication. In this connection, it is relevant to state that the Hon’ ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs., Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd., [1991] 55 ELT 433 (SC) has held that ‘ mere fact that the order of the appellate authority is not “acceptable” to the Department and is the subject matter of an appeal can furnish no ground for not following it unless its operation has been suspended by a competent court. We find that since the order of the Special Bench of the Tribunal is still holds the field…

Everest Industrial Ltd., Noida vs. Dy CIT Circle-1, Thane

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly

ITA 7791/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh Chaitanya Joshi &For Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 43B

…./2020 Everest Industries Limited, Noida. U.P. High Court of Bombay which is pending for adjudication. In this connection, it is relevant to state that the Hon’ ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs., Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd., [1991] 55 ELT 433 (SC) has held that ‘ mere fact that the order of the appellate authority is not “acceptable” to the Department and is the subject matter of an appeal can furnish no ground for not following it unless its operation has been suspended by a competent court. We find that since the order of the Special Bench of the Tribunal is still holds the field…

M/S. Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: Na

For Appellant: Sri Ramasubramaniyan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…assessment orders passed on 31-12-2017 have been quashed. The above action of learned Principal CIT is not in accordance with the standards of judicial discipline. Ld. A.R. relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kamalakshi Finance Corporation 55 ELT 433 for the above proposition. The above decision may have been rendered under Excise Law ; however, the ratio of decision is equally applicable to income tax matters as the principle of hierarchy remains same. Hence, the action of the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax in not following the directions and findings of the Tribunal and also ho…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4395/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…/s. 11 and not taxing the lease premium in the hands of the Appellant Assessee. The proposition that the lower judicial authority is bound to follow the order of the authority is supported by following decisions: a. UOI v. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. (55 ELT 433(SC) b. Nestle India Ltd. v. DCCT (59 taxmann.com 109) (Guj HC) (Pg 23 of LPB). c. Agarwal Warehousing & Leasing Ltd v. CIT (257 ITR 235) (MP HC) (Pg 40 of LPB). d. M/s. Cargo Handling Private Workers Pool v. DCIT, CCI (ITA 152 to 156/Vizag/2011) (Pg 43 of LPB). 3. Denial of Exemption u/s. 10(20) of the Act Holding that the appellant is not a Local…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4394/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…/s. 11 and not taxing the lease premium in the hands of the Appellant Assessee. The proposition that the lower judicial authority is bound to follow the order of the authority is supported by following decisions: a. UOI v. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. (55 ELT 433(SC) b. Nestle India Ltd. v. DCCT (59 taxmann.com 109) (Guj HC) (Pg 23 of LPB). c. Agarwal Warehousing & Leasing Ltd v. CIT (257 ITR 235) (MP HC) (Pg 40 of LPB). d. M/s. Cargo Handling Private Workers Pool v. DCIT, CCI (ITA 152 to 156/Vizag/2011) (Pg 43 of LPB). 3. Denial of Exemption u/s. 10(20) of the Act Holding that the appellant is not a Local…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4393/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…/s. 11 and not taxing the lease premium in the hands of the Appellant Assessee. The proposition that the lower judicial authority is bound to follow the order of the authority is supported by following decisions: a. UOI v. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. (55 ELT 433(SC) b. Nestle India Ltd. v. DCCT (59 taxmann.com 109) (Guj HC) (Pg 23 of LPB). c. Agarwal Warehousing & Leasing Ltd v. CIT (257 ITR 235) (MP HC) (Pg 40 of LPB). d. M/s. Cargo Handling Private Workers Pool v. DCIT, CCI (ITA 152 to 156/Vizag/2011) (Pg 43 of LPB). 3. Denial of Exemption u/s. 10(20) of the Act Holding that the appellant is not a Local…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4392/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…/s. 11 and not taxing the lease premium in the hands of the Appellant Assessee. The proposition that the lower judicial authority is bound to follow the order of the authority is supported by following decisions: a. UOI v. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. (55 ELT 433(SC) b. Nestle India Ltd. v. DCCT (59 taxmann.com 109) (Guj HC) (Pg 23 of LPB). c. Agarwal Warehousing & Leasing Ltd v. CIT (257 ITR 235) (MP HC) (Pg 40 of LPB). d. M/s. Cargo Handling Private Workers Pool v. DCIT, CCI (ITA 152 to 156/Vizag/2011) (Pg 43 of LPB). 3. Denial of Exemption u/s. 10(20) of the Act Holding that the appellant is not a Local…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4391/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…/s. 11 and not taxing the lease premium in the hands of the Appellant Assessee. The proposition that the lower judicial authority is bound to follow the order of the authority is supported by following decisions: a. UOI v. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. (55 ELT 433(SC) b. Nestle India Ltd. v. DCCT (59 taxmann.com 109) (Guj HC) (Pg 23 of LPB). c. Agarwal Warehousing & Leasing Ltd v. CIT (257 ITR 235) (MP HC) (Pg 40 of LPB). d. M/s. Cargo Handling Private Workers Pool v. DCIT, CCI (ITA 152 to 156/Vizag/2011) (Pg 43 of LPB). 3. Denial of Exemption u/s. 10(20) of the Act Holding that the appellant is not a Local…

Dy CIT CC 6 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Karanja Terminal and Logistics Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6898/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.6897 & 6898/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Mihir Naniwadekar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, D.R
Section 140A(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 221Section 221(1)

…ITA Nos. 6897 & 6898/Mum/2019 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2012-13 1 Dy.CIT, CC-6(3) Vs. M/s Karanja Terminal and Logistic Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos.6897 & 6898/MUM/2019 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s Karanja Terminal Tax, Central Circle – 6(3), Vs. and Logistic Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 1905, 19th Floor, 153, Makers Chambers Air India Building, Nariman III, Nariman Point, Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN No. AADCK9709Q (Revenue) (Assessee)…

Dy CIT CC 6 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Karanja Terminal and Logistics Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6897/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita Nos.6897 & 6898/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Mihir Naniwadekar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, D.R
Section 140A(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 221Section 221(1)

…ITA Nos. 6897 & 6898/Mum/2019 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2012-13 1 Dy.CIT, CC-6(3) Vs. M/s Karanja Terminal and Logistic Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos.6897 & 6898/MUM/2019 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s Karanja Terminal Tax, Central Circle – 6(3), Vs. and Logistic Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 1905, 19th Floor, 153, Makers Chambers Air India Building, Nariman III, Nariman Point, Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN No. AADCK9709Q (Revenue) (Assessee)…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Warangal vs. Gyana Kumari Rojanala, Warangal

In the result the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1779/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Dr. R. Deepak, D.R
Section 2(47)Section 45Section 53ASection 54Section 54F

…h have been respectfully followed, the canons of judicial discipline which have been adhered to. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jain Exports (P) Ltd., and Others vs. Union of India &. Others [3 SCC 579], Union of India & Others vs Kamlakshi Finance Corporation [55 ELT 433](SC) and the Hon'ble AP High Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. CTO (169 ITR 564) are respectfully followed. The Hon'ble AP High Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. CTO (169 ITR 564) while adjudicating a contempt of court case held: "It is clear from the judicial pronouncements above referred to that the authorities and…

Jyoti Harshad Mehta (Legal Heir of Late Harshad S. Mehta), Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT (C)- 2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1159/MUM/2020[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 1992-93
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 263Section 263(1)

…bunal are binding on all the tax authorities functioning under the jurisdiction of the tribunal. While so holding, it followed the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UoI Vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd (AIR 1992 Supreme Court 711, 712) 55 ELT 433 (S.C) which has ruled as under: ―It cannot be too vehemently emphasized that it is of utmost importance that, in disposing of the quasi-judicial issues before them, revenue officers are bound by the decisions of appellate authorities. The order of the Appellate collector is binding on the Assistant Collectors working within his jurisdiction and th…

M/S. V.S. Joshi & Associates, Kolhapur vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolhapur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 477/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.477/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha
Section 154Section 80I

…allowed the appeal of the assessee. In the assessment proceedings, assessee relied on the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in SLP No.7717 of 1990 in the case of Union of India and others Vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. AIR 1992 Supreme Court 711, 712) 55 ELT 433 (S.C). The Department is in the process of filing appeal before the Hon’ble High Court, Mumbai u/s.260A of the Act. Eventually, the AO disallowed the claim of deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Act by holding as under : “10.1 With due respect towards ratios of higher ups discussed as above, very respectfully it is essential to state here that the d…

M/S Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2487/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J.S. Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Ranjan, Adv. Sh. Vartik RFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Saroha, CIT(DR)
Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)

…Tribunal are binding on all the Revenue authorities functioning under the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. Dealing with this very aspect of the matter, the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd., AIR 1992 SC 711; [1991] 55 ELT 433 (SC) emphasized (page 712 of AIR 1992 SC) : "It cannot be too vehemently emphasized that it is of utmost importance that, in disposing of the quasi- judicial issues before them revenue officers are bound by the decisions of the appellate authorities. The order of the Appellate Collector is binding on the Assistant Collectors working within his ju…

Opus Reality Development Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 225/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Smt Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No.-225/Del/2014 (Assessment Year-2009-10) Opus Reality Development Ltd. Vs Acit Circle-13(1) 404, Roots Tower, New Delhi District Centre, Laxmi Nagar (Respondent) Delhi Aaaco9775H (Appellant)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153(3)Section 154Section 71Section 71(2)

…the Appellate Tribunal which is binding on the CIT(A) and has to be followed by the CIT(A) being superior appellate authority. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UoI Vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd (AIR 1992 Supreme Court 711, 712) 55 ELT 433 (S.C) ruled as under: “It cannot be too vehemently emphasized that it is of utmost importance that, in disposing of the quasi-judicial issues before them, revenue officers are bound by the decisions of appellate authorities. The order of the Appellate collector is binding on the Assistant Collectors working within his jurisdiction and the order of…

ACIT, Faridabad vs. M/S. Hindustan Syringes & Medical Devices Ltd., Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5407/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J.S. Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Saroha, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153A

…income of the assessee for the year. 6.3. However, I am bound by judicial discipline as held by a catena of judicial decisions. There is no decision of the jurisdictional High Court. Decisions in Union of India vs. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. (1991) 55 ELT 433 (SC); CIT vs. Ralsons Industries Ltd. (2007) 288 ITR 322 (SC); Triveni Chemicals v UOI (2007) 2SCC 503 (SC); Nokia Corporation v DC IT (International Taxation) (2007) 292 ITR 22 (Delhi) may be referred. While on the issue, I am also aware that when two High Courts have given different opinions not being jurisdictional High Court- the one favoring…