← All Phrases

“Section 4(3)”

Section References (mined)Section 4Section 4(3)53 judgments

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, DELHI

ITA 2985/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT
Section 132Section 13ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 29ASection 68

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shaw Wallace & Co. AIR 1932 PC 138, in the context of the Income Tax Act, 1922, held that Section 4(3)(v) of that Act was only clarificatory and "must be due to the over anxiety of the draftsman to make this clear beyond possibility

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI

ITA 2984/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT
Section 132Section 13ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 29ASection 68

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shaw Wallace & Co. AIR 1932 PC 138, in the context of the Income Tax Act, 1922, held that Section 4(3)(v) of that Act was only clarificatory and "must be due to the over anxiety of the draftsman to make this clear beyond possibility

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, DELHI

ITA 2983/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT
Section 132Section 13ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 29ASection 68

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shaw Wallace & Co. AIR 1932 PC 138, in the context of the Income Tax Act, 1922, held that Section 4(3)(v) of that Act was only clarificatory and "must be due to the over anxiety of the draftsman to make this clear beyond possibility

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI

ITA 2982/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT
Section 132Section 13ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 29ASection 68

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shaw Wallace & Co. AIR 1932 PC 138, in the context of the Income Tax Act, 1922, held that Section 4(3)(v) of that Act was only clarificatory and "must be due to the over anxiety of the draftsman to make this clear beyond possibility

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 31, DELHI

ITA 2966/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT
Section 132Section 13ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 29ASection 68

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shaw Wallace & Co. AIR 1932 PC 138, in the context of the Income Tax Act, 1922, held that Section 4(3)(v) of that Act was only clarificatory and "must be due to the over anxiety of the draftsman to make this clear beyond possibility

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

ITA 2813/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT
Section 132Section 13ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 29ASection 68

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shaw Wallace & Co. AIR 1932 PC 138, in the context of the Income Tax Act, 1922, held that Section 4(3)(v) of that Act was only clarificatory and "must be due to the over anxiety of the draftsman to make this clear beyond possibility

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

ITA 2812/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT
Section 132Section 13ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 29ASection 68

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shaw Wallace & Co. AIR 1932 PC 138, in the context of the Income Tax Act, 1922, held that Section 4(3)(v) of that Act was only clarificatory and "must be due to the over anxiety of the draftsman to make this clear beyond possibility

PUBLIC POLITICAL PARTY,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

ITA 2761/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT
Section 132Section 13ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 29ASection 68

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shaw Wallace & Co. AIR 1932 PC 138, in the context of the Income Tax Act, 1922, held that Section 4(3)(v) of that Act was only clarificatory and "must be due to the over anxiety of the draftsman to make this clear beyond possibility

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1249/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmr. Nikhil Sawhney, Vs. Dcit, 17, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, New Delhi-11003 Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaups0222Q

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur hansra, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

such profits are brought into the taxable territories. In support of this argument a reference has been made to section 4(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act as it stood prior to 1939 and reliance is placed on the decisions in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Somasundaram Chettiar ... Provident Investment Co. Ltd. In re [1932] 2 Comp. Cas. 312. It is true that section 4(3) of the Indian Income- tax Act, as it stood prior to 1939, said that "this Act (meaning the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922) shall not apply to certain classes of income

LUPIN LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 3, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3257/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year : 2019-20 Lupin Limited, Principal Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Kalpataru Inspire, Income Tax-3, Off Western Express Highway, Vs. Room No. 612, 6Th Floor, Santacruz (East), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400055. Maharshi Karve Road, Pan : Aaacl1069K Mumbai-400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora & Shri Pranay Gandhi Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 43(6)

question was whether this amount which was treated as paid on account of loss of profits was assessable to income-tax under Section 4(3)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1922. The Supreme Court held that the receipt was inseparably connected with the ownership and conduct of the business ... arose from it and therefore it was not exempt under Section 4(3)(vii) of the 1922 Act whereas in the appellant's case the insurance claim was received on account of the destruction of the iPad and computers (capital assets). Thus, the Supreme Court‟s decision in Raghuvanshi Mills

THE JEWELLERS AND DIAMOND TRADERS ASSOCIATION,MADRAS vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1093/CHNY/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. V. Swaminathan, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N., CIT
Section 12ASection 2(15)

public is vitally interest and if by the activities of the assessee that object is achieved, it would be within the meaning of section 4(3)(i) of the 1922 Act an advancement of an object of general public utility. In enacting the last paragraph of section 4(3

SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL ,SATNA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX CIRCLE, SATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 156/JAB/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2016-17 Sanjay Kumar Agarwal V. Acit Circle Satna Blooms Campus, Nh-75, Panna Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Road, Satna (Mp)-485001. Lines, Satna, Mp-485001. Tan/Pan:Ackpa2596H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sanjay Mishra, Adv Respondent By: Shri N. M. Prasad, Sr. Dr-1 Date Of Hearing: 19 08 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21 08 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N. M. Prasad, Sr. Dr-1
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

divested of the jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter on merits. 2.3 This is contrary to the express provisions of section 4(3) of the Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020, which provides that upon filing the declaration, the pending appeal shall be deemed to be withdrawn. 2.4 The learned

LATE DARIUS MOTASHAW (THROUGH LEGAL REP JEHAN MOTASHAW ),MUMBAI vs. CENTAL CIRCLE 4(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6352/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 250Section 4(3)Section 69

Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, по separate addition could be made under the Income Tax Act by virtue of Section 4(3) of the Black Money Act. 4. The Appellant craves leave to reserve to itself the right to add, after, amend or annul

LATE DARIUS MOTASHAW,MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6350/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 250Section 4(3)Section 69

Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, по separate addition could be made under the Income Tax Act by virtue of Section 4(3) of the Black Money Act. 4. The Appellant craves leave to reserve to itself the right to add, after, amend or annul

LATE DARIUS MOTASHAW,MUMBAI vs. JCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6349/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 250Section 4(3)Section 69

Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, по separate addition could be made under the Income Tax Act by virtue of Section 4(3) of the Black Money Act. 4. The Appellant craves leave to reserve to itself the right to add, after, amend or annul

LATE DARIUS MOTASHAW (THROUGH LEGAL REP JEHAN MOTASHAW),MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6348/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 250Section 4(3)Section 69

Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, по separate addition could be made under the Income Tax Act by virtue of Section 4(3) of the Black Money Act. 4. The Appellant craves leave to reserve to itself the right to add, after, amend or annul

LATE DARIUS MOTASHAW (TROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVA JEHAN MOTASHAW ),MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6347/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 250Section 4(3)Section 69

Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, по separate addition could be made under the Income Tax Act by virtue of Section 4(3) of the Black Money Act. 4. The Appellant craves leave to reserve to itself the right to add, after, amend or annul

LATE DARIUS MOTASHAW ( THROUGH LEGAL REP JEHAN MOTASHAW ),MUMBAI vs. JCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6346/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 250Section 4(3)Section 69

Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, по separate addition could be made under the Income Tax Act by virtue of Section 4(3) of the Black Money Act. 4. The Appellant craves leave to reserve to itself the right to add, after, amend or annul

LATE DARIUS MOTASHAW (THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE JEHAN MOTASHAW ),MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6345/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 250Section 4(3)Section 69

Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, по separate addition could be made under the Income Tax Act by virtue of Section 4(3) of the Black Money Act. 4. The Appellant craves leave to reserve to itself the right to add, after, amend or annul

SADULLA SYED NOORSHA SYED,NANDED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NANDED

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 167/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

gratuity of Rs.11,49,579/- is also eligible for full exemption as it is fully covered within the limit laid down as per section 4(3) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (as amended). With respect to the claim of exemption for leave encashment amounting to Rs.23

Showing 1–20 of 53 · Page 1 of 3