Union of India v. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd.

55 ELT 43Supreme Court of India1991#2302 most cited

What is Union of India v. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. authority for?

A decision by a Jurisdictional High Court carries higher precedence for the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and lower authorities within its jurisdiction than a decision by a Non-Jurisdictional High Court, upholding judicial discipline.

50

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Union of India v. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. · Kamalakshi Finance · 55 ELT 43 · 59 Taxmann.com 109 · jurisdictional High Court · non-jurisdictional High Court · binding precedent · judicial discipline · precedence value · Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

Also reported as

59 Taxmann.com 109

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69CSection 131Section 148Section 250

Issues it is cited on

price riggingbogus ltcgsection 142(3)bogus long term capital gainpenny stocksection 10(38)section 65b(4)preponderance of probabilitycolourable devicelong term capital gainssection 111aentry operator

Judgments citing Union of India v. Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd.

Shri Nitin Popatlal Thakkar, Mumbai vs. The DCIT Cent.Cir-3(4), Mumbai

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

ITA 1609/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2023AY 2014-15
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 69C

…would prevail over this tribunal and this tribunal need not take cognizance of the Hon‟ble Non-Jurisdictional High Court. The law is very well settled by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd reported in 55 ELT 43 (1991) that the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court would have higher precedence value than the decision of Hon‟ble Non-Jurisdictional High Court on the Tribunal. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court emphasised therein that the orders of the Tribunal should be followed by the authorities falling within its jurisdiction so that judicial discipline wo…

Smt Harhsa Nitin Thakkar, Mumbai vs. The Dy. Citi Cent. Cir -3(4), Mumbai

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

ITA 1608/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2023AY 2014-15
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 69C

…would prevail over this tribunal and this tribunal need not take cognizance of the Hon‟ble Non-Jurisdictional High Court. The law is very well settled by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd reported in 55 ELT 43 (1991) that the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court would have higher precedence value than the decision of Hon‟ble Non-Jurisdictional High Court on the Tribunal. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court emphasised therein that the orders of the Tribunal should be followed by the authorities falling within its jurisdiction so that judicial discipline wo…

Nisha Yogesh Thakkar, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(4), Mumbai

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

ITA 1607/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2023AY 2015-16
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 69C

…would prevail over this tribunal and this tribunal need not take cognizance of the Hon‟ble Non-Jurisdictional High Court. The law is very well settled by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd reported in 55 ELT 43 (1991) that the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court would have higher precedence value than the decision of Hon‟ble Non-Jurisdictional High Court on the Tribunal. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court emphasised therein that the orders of the Tribunal should be followed by the authorities falling within its jurisdiction so that judicial discipline wo…

Smt. Harsh A Nitin Thakkar, Raigad vs. The DCIT Cent. Cir -3(4), Mumbai

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

ITA 1606/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2023AY 2013-14
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 69C

…would prevail over this tribunal and this tribunal need not take cognizance of the Hon‟ble Non-Jurisdictional High Court. The law is very well settled by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd reported in 55 ELT 43 (1991) that the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court would have higher precedence value than the decision of Hon‟ble Non-Jurisdictional High Court on the Tribunal. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court emphasised therein that the orders of the Tribunal should be followed by the authorities falling within its jurisdiction so that judicial discipline wo…

Shri Yogesh P. Thakkar, Panvel vs. The DCIT, CC-3(4), Mumbai

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

ITA 1605/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2023AY 2014-15
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 69C

…would prevail over this tribunal and this tribunal need not take cognizance of the Hon‟ble Non-Jurisdictional High Court. The law is very well settled by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Kamalakshi Finance Corporation Ltd reported in 55 ELT 43 (1991) that the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court would have higher precedence value than the decision of Hon‟ble Non-Jurisdictional High Court on the Tribunal. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court emphasised therein that the orders of the Tribunal should be followed by the authorities falling within its jurisdiction so that judicial discipline wo…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 4391, 4392,4393,4394 & 4395/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) ITA NOs. 34 & 35/MUM/2020 (A.Y: 2011-12) Mumbai Metropolitan Region v. DDIT (Exemption) – 1(1) Development Authority (MMRDA) Room No. 519, 5th Floor Plot No. C-14 & C-15 Piramal Chambers Bandra Kurla Complex Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400012 Bandra (E), Mumbai -400051 PAN: AAATM7106R (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 4986, 4987, 4988,4989,4990/MUM/2…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 4391, 4392,4393,4394 & 4395/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) ITA NOs. 34 & 35/MUM/2020 (A.Y: 2011-12) Mumbai Metropolitan Region v. DDIT (Exemption) – 1(1) Development Authority (MMRDA) Room No. 519, 5th Floor Plot No. C-14 & C-15 Piramal Chambers Bandra Kurla Complex Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400012 Bandra (E), Mumbai -400051 PAN: AAATM7106R (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 4986, 4987, 4988,4989,4990/MUM/2…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 4391, 4392,4393,4394 & 4395/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) ITA NOs. 34 & 35/MUM/2020 (A.Y: 2011-12) Mumbai Metropolitan Region v. DDIT (Exemption) – 1(1) Development Authority (MMRDA) Room No. 519, 5th Floor Plot No. C-14 & C-15 Piramal Chambers Bandra Kurla Complex Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400012 Bandra (E), Mumbai -400051 PAN: AAATM7106R (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 4986, 4987, 4988,4989,4990/MUM/2…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 4391, 4392,4393,4394 & 4395/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) ITA NOs. 34 & 35/MUM/2020 (A.Y: 2011-12) Mumbai Metropolitan Region v. DDIT (Exemption) – 1(1) Development Authority (MMRDA) Room No. 519, 5th Floor Plot No. C-14 & C-15 Piramal Chambers Bandra Kurla Complex Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400012 Bandra (E), Mumbai -400051 PAN: AAATM7106R (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 4986, 4987, 4988,4989,4990/MUM/2…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 4391, 4392,4393,4394 & 4395/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) ITA NOs. 34 & 35/MUM/2020 (A.Y: 2011-12) Mumbai Metropolitan Region v. DDIT (Exemption) – 1(1) Development Authority (MMRDA) Room No. 519, 5th Floor Plot No. C-14 & C-15 Piramal Chambers Bandra Kurla Complex Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400012 Bandra (E), Mumbai -400051 PAN: AAATM7106R (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 4986, 4987, 4988,4989,4990/MUM/2…