How many judgments cite Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT?

29 judgments on BharatTax cite Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT (443 ITR 250), spanning 2021 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 32, Section 144C, Section 92CA, Section 115JAA, Section 144C(10).

Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT

443 ITR 250Supreme Court of India2022#4056 most cited

What is Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer has a duty to grant benefits and reliefs during assessment, even if they are not claimed by the assessee in their return of income.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT · 443 ITR 250 · Assessing Officer duty · grant benefits · reliefs during assessment · not claimed in ROI

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 32 Section 144C Section 92CA Section 115JAA Section 144C(10)Section 234B Section 234D

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 153(a)(1)section 10b(8)section 144(3)section 158a section 153(a)section 35(1)(ii)section 44c section 153a(1)(a)section 80ia(8)section 144c(10)section 139(5)section 115jaa

Judgments citing Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. Eicher Motors Limited, Delhi

ITA 3721/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 35

…additional claim though not made in the return, can be entertained by the CIT(A) / Tribunal and the principle rendered in Goetze (supra) does not impinge on powers of the appellate authorities to entertain such an additional claim: Wipro Finance Ltd. v. CIT: 443 ITR 250 (SC) National Thermal Power Limited v. CIT: 229 ITR 383 (SC) CIT v. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd.: 306 ITR 42 (Del.) CIT v. Aspentech India (P) Ltd.: ITA No. 1233/2011 (Del.)(HC) CIT v. Sam Global Securities Ltd.: (2014) 360 ITR 0682 (Del.)(HC) CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders P. Ltd. 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) JCIT v Hero Honda Finlease Ltd.: 115 T…

Eicher Motors Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 7(1) New Delhi, New Delhi

ITA 3525/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 35

Devendra Mehta, Jabalpur vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1) Jabalpur, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 80/JAB/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadaledevendra Mehta, Vs Dcit, 1084, Sanjivani Nagar, Circle-2(1), Jabalpur-482003 (M.P.) Jabalpur. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afppm8269P Assessee By Shri Sughosh Bhamore & Shri Hitesh Trivedi Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20/09/2023

Section 10Section 133Section 143(1)Section 154

…d before the Assessing officer by filing a revised return. (2019) 416 ITR 591 (Cal). The Goetze India LTD has already been Distinguished by Tribunals (2010) 4 ITR (Trib) 44 ITAT Chennai, By high Courts (2018) 402 ITR 400 (ker) and also by Supreme Court (2022) 443 ITR 250 (SC). Alternative Ground (without Prejudice to above) 10. That LD CIT (A) erred in not considering the fact that for most of the service tenure i.e up to 09-04-2012 the appellant was Government employee and only during last 4 years of his service he served as the employee of a Government Company. 11. That Ld.CIT(A) erred in not allowing the prora…

M/S Pricol Limited, Coimbatore vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 642/CHNY/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jul 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.642/Chny/2022 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Pricol Limited Dcit बनाम 109, Cpm Towers, Race Course, Corporate Circle-2, / Vs. Coimbatore-641 018. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagcp-0139-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri T.Banusekar (Ca) & Shri Suraj Nahar (Ca)-Ld.Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R.Mohan Reddy (Cit)- Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-04-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20-07-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri T.Banusekar (CA) &For Respondent: Shri R.Mohan Reddy (CIT)- Ld. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा ! एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ%वाल ,लेखा सद( के सम!। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.642/Chny/2022 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/s. Pricol Limited DCIT बनाम 109, CPM Towers, Race Course, Corporate Circle-2, / Vs. Coimbatore-641 018. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAGCP-0139-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri T.Banusekar (CA) & Shri Suraj Nahar (CA)-Ld.ARs…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle- 2(1), Bilaspur vs. M/S Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Bilaspur

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 92/RPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 92/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Bilaspur .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Sahakari Bhawan, Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur (C.G.) Pan : Aaaaj0607P ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 263(1)

…2016) 382 ITR 343 (SC) (ix) CIT Vs. Bechtel International Inc. (2019) 414 ITR 558 (Bom. HC) (x) CIT Vs. Asea Brown Boveri Ltd. (2020) 427 ITR 166 ( Kar.HC) (xi) CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Textile Mill Ltd. (1967) 66 ITR 710 (SC) (xii) Wipro Finance Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 443 ITR 250 (SC) Our attention was specifically drawn by the Ld. AR to the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT (International Taxation) Vs. Bechtel International Inc. (2019) 414 ITR 558 (Bom. HC). Referring to the aforesaid judicial pronouncement, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the Hon’ble High Court while approving the view…

M/S. Frick India Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 850/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ejected by the lower authorities by appling the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. reported in 284 ITR 323. 4.2. We find that in the recent Supreme Court decision rendered in the case of Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 443 ITR 250, the Hon’ble Supreme Court after considering the decision rendered in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. had reiterated that the decision in Goetze (India) Ltd. make it very clear that limitation period for considering any fresh claim of an assessee would apply only to the assessing authority and does not impinge upon the preliminary powers of the T…

Frick India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1083/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

M/S. Development Consultants Pvt. Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-IV, & Anr

The appeal is allowed

ITA/845/2008HC Calcutta09 Feb 2023

Bench: :

Section 254Section 260A

…e correctness of the finding of the learned Tribunal has to be examined. 3 We need not labour much to find an answer to the query in the light of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Wipro Finance Limited vs. Commissioner of Income tax, (2022) 443 ITR 250 (SC) wherein identical argument was made by the revenue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court placing reliance on Goetzee India Limited. The said argument was rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and it was held that such a limitation would apply to the assessing authority only but it will not impinge upon plenary powers of the Tribunal under Se…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 vs. Navin Chand Suchanti

The appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITAT/1/2018HC Calcutta24 Nov 2021

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 1St May 2024. Appearance: Ms. Smita Das De, Advocate … For The Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate … For The Respondent. 1. Heard Smt. Smita Das De, Learned Senior Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Sri J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Ananda Sen, Learned Counsel For The Respondent Assessee. 2.

Section 43BSection 43D

…duction. We hold and direct accordingly and allow the grounds raised by the assessee in this regard.” 8. We find that the controversy is squarely covered by a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Wipro Industries Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2022] 443 ITR 250 (SC) in which Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- “10. The learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Department had faintly argued that since the appellant in its return 6 had taken a conscious explicit plea with regard to the part of the claim being ascribable to capital expenditure and partly to revenue expenditure, it was not…