Vidarbha Irrigation Devs. Corpn v. ACIT

278 ITR 521High Court2005#12583 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 54F

Judgments citing Vidarbha Irrigation Devs. Corpn v. ACIT

SUBHASH CHAND KASERA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 47(1), NEW DELHI

Ground of Appeal 2 and 3 are dismissed

ITA 4092/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Roy

Section 142Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

…atute, the function of the court of law is not to give words in the statute a strained and unnatural meaning to cover and extent its applicability to the areas not intended to be covered under the said statute. Vidarbha Irrigation Dev. Corpn. v/s ACIT [(2005) 278 ITR 521 (Bom)]. It is not permissible to construe any provision of a statute, much less a taxing provision, by reading into it more words than its contains. CIT v/s. Vadilal Lallubhai [(1972) 86 ITR 2 (SC)] Literal construction means that there is no room for any intendment. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One can only look fairly at…

BAJRANG ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED,ROURKELA vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiabajrang Engineers Pvt. Ltd. J-3/4, Civil Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan No.Aacca 6655 L …………….. Assessee Versus The Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur ………………Revenue

Section 153Section 153C

…th contents of documents seized, the Tribunal could not declare it as invalid on by per technical ground of incorrect terminology used in said note. 17 g) The Hon'ble Mumbai High Court in the case of Vidharba Irrigation Development Corporation vs. Addl. CIT (278 ITR 521) held that while construing fiscal statute, regard must be had to the strict letter of law and if the court is satisfied that the case falls strictly within the ambit of the relevant provisions of the taxing statute, tax liability under such provisions must be imposed, Therefore while interpreting tax statute, the function of the court of law is…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 599/DEL/2014[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 1994-95

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 2553/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, (Appeals)-Ix, Income Tax Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 Office, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 2641/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-6(1), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 468/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 1994-95 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Jcit(Osd), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-6(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(a)Section 244A(3)Section 254

…tute, the function of the court of law is not to give words in the statute a strained and unnatural meaning to cover and extent its applicability to the areas not intended to be covered under the said statute. Vidarbha Irrigation Devs. Corpn. vs. ACIT [(2005) 278 ITR 521 (Bom)]. 46. It is not permissible to construe any provision of a statute, much less a taxing provision, by reading into it more words than its contains. CIT vs. Vadilal Lallubhai [(1972) 86 ITR 2 (SC)]. Literal construction means that there is no room for any intendment. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One can only look fairl…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT (OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 468/DEL/2014[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 1994-95

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 2553/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, (Appeals)-Ix, Income Tax Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 Office, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 2641/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-6(1), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 468/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 1994-95 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Jcit(Osd), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-6(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(a)Section 244A(3)Section 254

…tute, the function of the court of law is not to give words in the statute a strained and unnatural meaning to cover and extent its applicability to the areas not intended to be covered under the said statute. Vidarbha Irrigation Devs. Corpn. vs. ACIT [(2005) 278 ITR 521 (Bom)]. 46. It is not permissible to construe any provision of a statute, much less a taxing provision, by reading into it more words than its contains. CIT vs. Vadilal Lallubhai [(1972) 86 ITR 2 (SC)]. Literal construction means that there is no room for any intendment. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One can only look fairl…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2641/DEL/2013[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 1999-00

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 2553/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, (Appeals)-Ix, Income Tax Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 Office, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 2641/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-6(1), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 468/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 1994-95 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Jcit(Osd), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-6(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(a)Section 244A(3)Section 254

…tute, the function of the court of law is not to give words in the statute a strained and unnatural meaning to cover and extent its applicability to the areas not intended to be covered under the said statute. Vidarbha Irrigation Devs. Corpn. vs. ACIT [(2005) 278 ITR 521 (Bom)]. 46. It is not permissible to construe any provision of a statute, much less a taxing provision, by reading into it more words than its contains. CIT vs. Vadilal Lallubhai [(1972) 86 ITR 2 (SC)]. Literal construction means that there is no room for any intendment. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One can only look fairl…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2553/DEL/2013[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 1999-00

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 2553/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, (Appeals)-Ix, Income Tax Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 Office, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 2641/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-6(1), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 468/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 1994-95 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Jcit(Osd), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-6(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(a)Section 244A(3)Section 254

…tute, the function of the court of law is not to give words in the statute a strained and unnatural meaning to cover and extent its applicability to the areas not intended to be covered under the said statute. Vidarbha Irrigation Devs. Corpn. vs. ACIT [(2005) 278 ITR 521 (Bom)]. 46. It is not permissible to construe any provision of a statute, much less a taxing provision, by reading into it more words than its contains. CIT vs. Vadilal Lallubhai [(1972) 86 ITR 2 (SC)]. Literal construction means that there is no room for any intendment. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One can only look fairl…

ADARSH KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 5096/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, & Nippun Mital, CAsFor Respondent: Sh. Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153C

…e, the function of the court of law is not to give words in the statute a strained and unnatural meaning to cover and extent its applicability to the areas not intended to be covered 'under the said statute. Vidarbha Irrigation Dev. Corpn. v/s ACIT [(2005) 278 ITR 521 (Born)]. It is not permissible to construe any provision of a statute, much less a taxing provision, by reading into it more words than its contains. CIT vs: Vadilal Lallubhai [(1972) 86 ITR 2 (SC)] Literal construction means that there is no room for any intendment. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One can only look fairly…

ADARSH KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 5095/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, & Nippun Mital, CAsFor Respondent: Sh. Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153C

…e, the function of the court of law is not to give words in the statute a strained and unnatural meaning to cover and extent its applicability to the areas not intended to be covered 'under the said statute. Vidarbha Irrigation Dev. Corpn. v/s ACIT [(2005) 278 ITR 521 (Born)]. It is not permissible to construe any provision of a statute, much less a taxing provision, by reading into it more words than its contains. CIT vs: Vadilal Lallubhai [(1972) 86 ITR 2 (SC)] Literal construction means that there is no room for any intendment. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One can only look fairly…

Vidarbha Irrigation Devs. Corpn v. ACIT (278 ITR 521) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax