ZAHIRA HABIBULLAH SHEIKH AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF GUJARAJ AND OTHERS. 31

2 SCC 1Reported decision1998#581 most cited
167

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2003 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153ASection 153CSection 153D

Issues it is cited on

section 153crsection 132(2)section 132(1)(a)section 153c proceedingssettlement applicationexplanation to section 37section 91full and true disclosuresection 292bbsection 129section 127section 292b

Judgments citing ZAHIRA HABIBULLAH SHEIKH AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF GUJARAJ AND OTHERS. 31

Sri S Baghiratha vs. The Principal Secretary

WP/22935/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

Mr Jai Kishan Virwani vs. State of Karnataka

WP/34675/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

R Nagarathna vs. State of Karnataka

WP/8187/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

B Yuvaraj vs. The State of Karnataka

WP/56988/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

Sri B S Patil vs. The State of Karnataka

WP/23435/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

Sri Sanjay Jayaram vs. The State of Karnataka

WP/15270/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

Boralingaiah vs. State of Karnataka

WP/33339/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

S B Jagadeesh vs. State of Karnataka

WP/51160/2017HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

Smt. V.Krishnamma vs. The State of Karnataka

WP/36324/2017HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

Sri Santosh A Shetty vs. The State of Karantaka

WP/29668/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Kesoram Industries Ltd

ITAT/17/2020HC Calcutta13 Jan 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

…is accused of wrong doing in which case the single directing mind or directing mind and will is sought to be identified in order to fix liability. The doctrine of 19 (2018) 7 SCC 443 20 (2019) 2 SCC 1 21 (2005) 5 SCC 465 22 (1998) 6 SCC 103 23 (1991) 4 SCC 22 24 AIR 1973 Cal 450 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 108 of 300 identification does not apply to large listed companies. To explain the above preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme…

J.R.D Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (E), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3738/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2020AY 2014-15
Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 263

…ITA No. 3738/Mum/2019 Assessment year: 2014-15 Page 1 of 43 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI F BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Justice P P Bhatt (President) and Pramod Kumar (Vice President)] Assessment year: 2014-15 J R D Tata Trust ……………………….Appellant Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street Fort, Mumbai 400 001[PAN: AAATT0165F] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption Circle 2(1), Mumbai ……………………Respondent Appearances by P J Pardiwala, Sr Advocate, along-with Madhur Agarwal, Sukh Sagar Syal, T P Ostwal and Indira Anand for the appellant Rajesh Damor (CIT-DR) and Brijendra Kumar for the respondent Date of c…

Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (E), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3737/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2020AY 2014-15
Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 263

…ITA No. 3737/Mum/2019 Assessment year: 2014-15 Page 1 of 43 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI F BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Justice P P Bhatt (President) and Pramod Kumar (Vice President)] Assessment year: 2014-15 Sir Ratan Tata Trust ……………………….Appellant Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street Fort, Mumbai 400 001[PAN: AAATS1013P] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption Circle 2(1), Mumbai ……………………Respondent Appearances by P J Pardiwala, Sr Advocate, along-with Madhur Agarwal, Sukh Sagar Syal, T P Ostwal and Indira Anand for the appellant Debashish Chandra (CIT-DR) and Brijendra Kumar for the respondent…

Shweta Chhawchharia vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-12

ITAT/15/2020HC Calcutta21 Dec 2020

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA

…is accused of wrong doing in which case the single directing mind or directing mind and will is sought to be identified in order to fix liability. The doctrine of 19 (2018) 7 SCC 443 20 (2019) 2 SCC 1 21 (2005) 5 SCC 465 22 (1998) 6 SCC 103 23 (1991) 4 SCC 22 24 AIR 1973 Cal 450 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 108 of 300 identification does not apply to large listed companies. To explain the above preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2, Kolkata vs. Electrocast Sales India Ltd

ITAT/11/2020HC Calcutta18 Dec 2020

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA

…is accused of wrong doing in which case the single directing mind or directing mind and will is sought to be identified in order to fix liability. The doctrine of 19 (2018) 7 SCC 443 20 (2019) 2 SCC 1 21 (2005) 5 SCC 465 22 (1998) 6 SCC 103 23 (1991) 4 SCC 22 24 AIR 1973 Cal 450 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 108 of 300 identification does not apply to large listed companies. To explain the above preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 vs. M/S Karnataka State Financial

ITA/463/2018HC Karnataka12 Nov 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

M/s. Canara Securities Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/3/2020HC Telangana25 Aug 2020

Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD

…is accused of wrong doing in which case the single directing mind or directing mind and will is sought to be identified in order to fix liability. The doctrine of 19 (2018) 7 SCC 443 20 (2019) 2 SCC 1 21 (2005) 5 SCC 465 22 (1998) 6 SCC 103 23 (1991) 4 SCC 22 24 AIR 1973 Cal 450 (APO NOS. 89, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96 AND 98 OF 2020) REPORTABLE Page 108 of 300 identification does not apply to large listed companies. To explain the above preposition reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs. M/S Wipro Ge Medical Systems Pvt Ltd

RP/463/2018HC Karnataka21 Dec 2018

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,K.NATARAJAN

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

The Commisioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Dell International Services

ITA/235/2018HC Karnataka09 Nov 2018

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,BELLUNKE A.S

…M REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND OTHERS. 362 7. (1996) 3 SCC 709: STATE OF A.P. AND OTHERS Vs. MCDOWELL & CO. AND OTHERS. 8. (1968) 3 SCR 662: AIR 1969 SC 78: 22 STC 416 : DHULABHAI Vs. STATE OF M.P. 9. (1982) 2 SCC 134: GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THUMMALA KRISHNA RAO AND ANOTHER. 10.(2017) 13 SCC 661: M. SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE. 11.(1989) 4 SCC 630: SHAN SUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA. 12.(1998) 5 SCC 343: STATE OF HARYANA Vs. BRIJ LAL MUTTAL AND OTHERS.…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 vs. Shanghai Electric Group Co. Ltd

ITA/461/2018HC Delhi17 Apr 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 9

…1 to 8, therefore, form a part of a Group of Companies, who are inextricably linked together to execute the project. Learned senior counsels rely on the judgement in the case of Arcelormittal India Private Limited v. Satish Kumar Gupta and Others, [(2019) 2 SCC 1], wherein principles were laid down to apply the doctrine of „lifting the corporate veil‟. It is submitted that the doctrine has been applied by Courts to prevent impropriety as in the present case, where the Petitioner having completed its obligations, has not been paid his dues and the Respondents are using their Group structure to play fraud…