Union of India v. Raghubir Singh AIR 1989 SC 1933, Union of India v. S.K. Kapoor

16 SCC 623Reported decision2014#11184 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Judgments citing Union of India v. Raghubir Singh AIR 1989 SC 1933, Union of India v. S.K. Kapoor

MR. BINEESH KODIYERI vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

WP/13261/2020HC Karnataka16 Mar 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Suraj Govindaraj Writ Petition No. 13261 Of 2020 (Gm-Res) Between: Mr. Bineesh Kodiyeri S/O Mr. Kodiyeri Balakrishnan Aged About 37 Years Kootamvilla Lane, Maruthankuzhi Thiruvananthapuram District Kerala State – 695013

Section 19Section 482

…WP No. 13261 of 2020 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 13261 OF 2020 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: MR. BINEESH KODIYERI S/O MR. KODIYERI BALAKRISHNAN AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS KOOTAMVILLA LANE, MARUTHANKUZHI THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT KERALA STATE – 695013 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARAVIND KAMATH, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. RENJITH SHANKER.V, ADVOCATE) AND: DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY DIRECTOR GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE BE…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S AZTEC SOFT LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 878/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Oct 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Jaya Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R
Section 10A

…learned counsel for the Assessee placed reliance on the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Raghubir Singh AIR 1989 SC 1933, Union of India v. S.K. Kapoor [2011] 4 SCC 589 and Sundeep Kumar Bafna v. State of Maharashtra [2014] 16 SCC 623. In the aforesaid decisions the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in a situation where there are conflicting decisions of High Court on an issue which are irreconcileable and pronounced by judges of co-equal strength, then the earlier view has to be followed as the later decision has to be regarded as per incuriam. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the c…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. JIVHESHWARA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 349/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Jaya Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R
Section 10A

…learned counsel for the Assessee placed reliance on the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Raghubir Singh AIR 1989 SC 1933, Union of India v. S.K. Kapoor [2011] 4 SCC 589 and Sundeep Kumar Bafna v. State of Maharashtra [2014] 16 SCC 623. In the aforesaid decisions the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in a situation where there are conflicting decisions of High Court on an issue which are irreconcileable and pronounced by judges of co-equal strength, then the earlier view has to be followed as the later decision has to be regarded as per incuriam. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the c…

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1248/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimr. Nikhil Sawhney Acit, 17 – Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, Vs. New Delhi – 110 003. Noida. Pan: Aaups0222Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143

…roneously reached the conclusion; and (vii) when it is an erroneous decision, i.e, a decision conflicting with the fundamental principles of law.‖ (emphasis supplied). (vii) The Supreme Court in the case of Sandeep Kumar Bafna v. State of Maharashtra: (2014) 16 SCC 623 [refer pages 117-2017 @ 196 43 | P a g e of Case Laws PB-2] explained the principle of per-incuriam in the following words: ―19. It cannot be overemphasized that the discipline demanded by a precedent or the disqualification or diminution of a decision on the application of the per incuriam rule is of great importance, since without it, certaint…

ITO, BANGALORE vs. M/S CENDUIT INDIA SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

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

ITA 59/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R.Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Ketan K Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 431B

…l for the Assessee placed reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Raghubir Singh AIR 1989 SC 1933, Union of India Vs. S.K. Kapoor (2011) 4 SCC 589 and Sundeep Kumar Bafna Vs. State of Maharashtra and another (2014) 16 SCC 623. In the aforesaid decisions the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that in a situation where there are conflicting decisions of High Court on an issue which are irreconcileable and pronounced by judges of co-equal strength, then the earlier view has to be followed as the later decision has to be regarded as per incuriam. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the c…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S INDEPENDENT TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed and the CO by the assessee is also partly allowed

ITA 1086/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Pradeep, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sreenandini Das, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 92Section 92C

…l for the Assessee placed reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Raghubir Singh AIR 1989 SC 1933, Union of India Vs. S.K. Kapoor (2011) 4 SCC 589 and Sundeep Kumar Bafna Vs. State of Maharashtra and another (2014) 16 SCC 623. In the aforesaid decisions the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that in a situation where there are conflicting decisions of High Court on an issue which are irreconcileable and pronounced by judges of co-equal strength, then the earlier view has to be followed as the later decision has to be regarded as per incuriam. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the c…

ITO, WD-3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PIONEER IRON & STEEL CORPORATION PVT. LTD., HOWRAH

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 203/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jun 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.203/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito, Ward-3(3), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Pioneer Iron & Steel Corporation (P) Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, 4Th Floor, 6, Tarachand Ganguly Street, Howrah – Chowringhee Sq., Kolkata – 700 069. 711202. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aabcp 6093 L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tiwari, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri R. K. Patodi, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(v)Section 55A

…th, then the earlier view has to be followed as the later decision has to be regarded as per incurium. In this regard he drew our attention to a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sundeep Kumar Bafna Vs. State of Maharashtra & another (2014) 16 SCC 623 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court took the view (at page- 642 (Para-19) that a decision or judgment can also be per incuriam if it is not possible to reconcile its ratio with that of a previously pronounced judgment of a Co-equal or Larger Bench and when High Courts encounter two or more mutually irreconcilable decisions of the Supreme Court cited…

JAYAMUTHU vs. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION FOR COOPERATION

In the result, we dismiss all the writ

WA/3482/2015HC Karnataka21 Apr 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),B.V.NAGARATHNA

Section 4

…another vs. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad and Others [(2003) 7 SCC 693] iv) Nandhi Minerals vs. State of Karnataka [SCC Online KAR 3174] v) Pundalik vs. State of Maharashtra and Others [(2005) 7 SCC 181] vi) (2008) 12 SCC 675 vii) (2014) 16 SCC 623 -: 19 :- viii) State of Uttar Pradesh and Another vs. Uttar Pradesh Rajya Khanu Vikas Nigama Sangharsh Samiti and Others [(2008) 12 SCC 675] 11. Learned senior counsel for the appellant contended that the rejection of his nomination as a candidate being illegal, the appellant need not have waited for the election proce…

HAROHALLI MILK PRODUCERS vs. STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER

In the result, we dismiss all the writ

WA/4515/2015HC Karnataka21 Apr 2017

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),B.V.NAGARATHNA

Section 4

…another vs. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad and Others [(2003) 7 SCC 693] iv) Nandhi Minerals vs. State of Karnataka [SCC Online KAR 3174] v) Pundalik vs. State of Maharashtra and Others [(2005) 7 SCC 181] vi) (2008) 12 SCC 675 vii) (2014) 16 SCC 623 -: 19 :- viii) State of Uttar Pradesh and Another vs. Uttar Pradesh Rajya Khanu Vikas Nigama Sangharsh Samiti and Others [(2008) 12 SCC 675] 11. Learned senior counsel for the appellant contended that the rejection of his nomination as a candidate being illegal, the appellant need not have waited for the election proce…

Union of India v. Raghubir Singh AIR 1989 SC 1933, Union of India v. S.K. Kapoor (16 SCC 623) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax