← All Phrases

“rule of consistency”

Judicial DoctrinesRadhasoamiRadhasoami1,041 judgments

The decision most relied on for rule of consistency is M/s Sahara India (Farms) v. CIT & Anr. (300 ITR 403), cited in 268 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on rule of consistency

M/s Sahara India (Farms) v. CIT & Anr.
300 ITR 403 · 2008 · Supreme Court
268
citing judgments

Administrative orders must be consistent with the rules of natural justice.

DIT (E) v. Apparel Export Promotion Council
245 ITR 492 · 2000 · High Court
193
citing judgments

The rule of consistency applies when facts or legal positions remain unchanged in earlier assessment years, preventing the Revenue from adopting a divergent stance in subsequent years without new material. This ensures stability and predictability in tax assessments.

Munjal Sales Corporation v. CIT
298 ITR 298 · 2008 · Supreme Court
191
citing judgments

The Supreme Court approves the mixed fund theory, holding that no interest disallowance is warranted under section 36(1)(iii) if investments or advances are made from the assessee's own non-interest bearing funds, even when mixed funds are available. This presumption applies when non-interest bearing funds are sufficient to meet the investments.

(i) Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain
1 SCC 373 · 1997 · Reported
187
citing judgments

A statute must be read as a whole, construing every clause with reference to its context and other provisions, to determine the legislature's real intention and ensure a consistent enactment. This principle, known as "ex visceribus actus," helps avoid inconsistencies within the law.

Berger Paints India Ltd. v. CIT
266 ITR 99 · 2004 · Supreme Court
181
citing judgments

The Revenue cannot take a conflicting stand from what it had earlier accepted in a previous assessment year without compelling justification. This principle of consistency applies to various issues, including the treatment of customs duty in closing inventory.

Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT
244 ITR 734 · 2000 · High Court
168
citing judgments

The Revenue is bound by the rule of consistency and cannot adopt a divergent position in a subsequent assessment year unless there is a change in facts or law.

Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ld v. DCIT
23 Taxmann.com 265 · 2012 · High Court
147
citing judgments

The rule of consistency does not override the correct application of law and should not be applied if it leads to an anomalous outcome.

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Union of India
282 ITR 273 · 2006 · Supreme Court
136
citing judgments

The rule of consistency requires that in the absence of any change in material facts or law, a different view or decision on an issue cannot be adopted for subsequent assessment years, thus ensuring uniformity in tax assessments.

Judgments citing rule of consistency

The Tarkwari Co-Operative Agriculture Service Society Ltd., Hamirpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Hamirpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 952/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 952/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Tarkwari Co-Operative Agriculture Service Society Ltd. Vill: Tarkwari, P.O. Tarkwari, Tehsil: Bhoranj, Dist: Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh-177001 बनाम The ITO Ward, Hamirpur स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABAT1500E प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent अपीलार्थी/Appellant निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Shri Ajay Patyal, Advocate Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Da

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Patyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 119Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80ASection 80P

impugned assessment year 2018- 19. This is a consistent stand taken by the Chandigarh Benches and therefore, to maintain the rule of consistency and in absence of said orders being disturbed/reversed by the higher authorities, I find merit in the grievance raised by the assessee and the same is accepted

Striton Properties Private Limited (Erstwhile Mars Hotels and Resorts Private Limited), Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3945/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant S. Pathak, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. A/R
Section 32

Cama has rightly referred to the decision in M/s. Radhasoami Satsang, Saomi Bagh, Agra (supra) wherein the Supreme Court has accepted the rule of consistency as a settled principle of law. In a recent decision of this Court in Banzai Estates P. Ltd. (supra), a Division Bench of this Court ... which followed the decision I.T.A. No. 3944/Mum/2024 & I.T.A. No. 3945/Mum/2024 4 in Radhasoami Satsang Sabha (supra) accepted the rule of consistency. The following observations of the Supreme Court are required to be noted:- "15. The question in Radhasoami Satsang v. Commissioner of Income

Striton Properties Private Limited (Erstwhile Mars Hotel and Resorts Private Limited), Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3944/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant S. Pathak, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. A/R
Section 32

Cama has rightly referred to the decision in M/s. Radhasoami Satsang, Saomi Bagh, Agra (supra) wherein the Supreme Court has accepted the rule of consistency as a settled principle of law. In a recent decision of this Court in Banzai Estates P. Ltd. (supra), a Division Bench of this Court ... which followed the decision I.T.A. No. 3944/Mum/2024 & I.T.A. No. 3945/Mum/2024 4 in Radhasoami Satsang Sabha (supra) accepted the rule of consistency. The following observations of the Supreme Court are required to be noted:- "15. The question in Radhasoami Satsang v. Commissioner of Income

Sysmex India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. C.I.T. 15(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4454/MUM/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Tikekar, C.A. & Shri Ashish Thakurdesai, C.A., A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. D/R
Section 234BSection 234CSection 234DSection 244ASection 80

done by the assessee since past many years which have been accepted by the revenue. Therefore, there is no basis for breaching the rule of consistency. 8.1. Per contra, the ld. D/R strongly supported the findings of the AO. I.T.A. No. 4454/Mum/2024 4 9. We have given a thoughtful consideration ... have duly considered. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the action of the AO which is in breach to the Rule of consistency. We accordingly direct the AO to accept the basis of allocation made by the assessee and allow Ground No. 1. 10. The next issue

Mehrunnisan Sherwani, Okhla vs. Income Tax Officer W 28(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4728/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

Section 142

issue in AY 2011-12 were on different set of facts or the same was assailed before the higher appellate authority. Following the rule of consistency, we see no reason to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A) on this issue in the impugned assessment year. Hence, ground

Sms Concast Ag, New Delhi vs. ACIT, (International Taxation), Circle- 3(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of AYs 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18

ITA 2695/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanddit, Circle 2 (2), Vs. Sms Siemag Ag, New Delhi. C/O Mohinder Puri & Co., 1A-1D, Vandhna, 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi – 110 01. (Aadcs1173J) Sms Siemag Ag, Vs. Ddit, Circle 2 (2), C/O Mohinder Puri & Co., New Delhi. 1A-1D, Vandhna, 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi – 110 01. (Aadcs1173J)

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 148

virtue of status of the assessee and the said status has to be taken for a specific previous year. The rule of consistency is determined on the basis of stay in India as defined in the Act has to be greater than six months. In consistency with the principles

M/S. Bhiwandi Nzampur Nagarpalika Collage, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Kalyan

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

ITA 4242/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S. Bhiwandi Nizampur Assessing Officer, Ward 1(1), Nagarpalika College Mohan Plaza, Katak Pada, Kalyan, 1, Dhamankar Naka, Bhiwandi, Vs. Dist. Thane – 421301. Vidyashram, S. O. Thane – 421305. Pan/Gir No. Aaaab1757C (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. H. N. Motiwalla Respondent By : Mr. Tushar Mohite, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2024 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Only On The Ground That The Appellant Has Not Made Payment Equal To Advance Tax Which Was Due On Its Income Without Appreciating The Fact That The Appellant Is A College Affiliated To University Of Mumbai Under The Management Of Padmashri Annasahib Jadhav Bhartiya Samaj Unnati Mandal (Trust) Bhiwandi Assessed Under Pan Aaatp2888P. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Said Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax Has Also Erred In Not Considering The Ground That The Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Has Erred In Estimating @ 8% On College Fee Receipt Of Rs. 1,63,75,639/- I.E. Rs. 13,10,051/- As Business Receipt Without Appreciating

For Appellant: Shri. H. N. MotiwallaFor Respondent: Mr. Tushar Mohite, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

2019/20, in appellant's own case, particularly when, there is no change in the facts of the case and therefore the Principle of Rules of Consistency should have been followed.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an ‘Association of Person’ (AOP) and has not filed ... prayed that even for this year, there has to be no addition made in the hands of the assessee, as the rule of consistency would be applicable in assessee’s case on no change in facts and circumstances. 9. The learned Departmental Representative ('ld. DR' for short) for the revenue

DCIT, Circle, Rohtak vs. Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1822/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Smt. Renu Jauhriआअसं.1820 To 1822/िद"ी/2023 (िन.व. 2016-17 To 2018-19)

For Appellant: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Gupta, Advocate
Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 22Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80P

assessment years where assessments were completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, the claim of the assessee has been accepted by the AO. The rule of consistency demands that where the assessee has claimed an expenditure following the same accounting policy in preceding and succeeding assessment years and the same

DCIT, Circle, Rohtak vs. Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1821/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Smt. Renu Jauhriआअसं.1820 To 1822/िद"ी/2023 (िन.व. 2016-17 To 2018-19)

For Appellant: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Gupta, Advocate
Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 22Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80P

assessment years where assessments were completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, the claim of the assessee has been accepted by the AO. The rule of consistency demands that where the assessee has claimed an expenditure following the same accounting policy in preceding and succeeding assessment years and the same

DCIT Circle, Rohtak vs. Sarva Haryana Garmin Bank, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1820/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Smt. Renu Jauhriआअसं.1820 To 1822/िद"ी/2023 (िन.व. 2016-17 To 2018-19)

For Appellant: Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Gupta, Advocate
Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 22Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80P

assessment years where assessments were completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, the claim of the assessee has been accepted by the AO. The rule of consistency demands that where the assessee has claimed an expenditure following the same accounting policy in preceding and succeeding assessment years and the same

DCIT Circle- 15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Hrel Real Estate Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue as well as In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue as well as cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2837/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Ms. Priyanka Jain

order order in in appeal appeal no. no. CIT CIT (A) (A) 24, 24, Mumbai/10592/2017 Mumbai/10592/2017-18 dated 12.10.2022 for AY.2009-10 following 10 following rule of consistency. consistency. 5.3. The appellant submits that the Hon’ble ITAT has reaffirmed this 5.3. The appellant submits that the Hon’ble ITAT has reaffirmed

DCIT Circle- 15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Hrel Real Estate Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue as well as In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue as well as cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2825/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Ms. Priyanka Jain

order order in in appeal appeal no. no. CIT CIT (A) (A) 24, 24, Mumbai/10592/2017 Mumbai/10592/2017-18 dated 12.10.2022 for AY.2009-10 following 10 following rule of consistency. consistency. 5.3. The appellant submits that the Hon’ble ITAT has reaffirmed this 5.3. The appellant submits that the Hon’ble ITAT has reaffirmed

DCIT, Circle-15(1)(2), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgarte vs. Hrel Real Estate Ltd, Hincon House, Vikhroli West

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue as well as In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue as well as cross-objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1531/MUM/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Biswanath Das, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Ms. Priyanka Jain

order order in in appeal appeal no. no. CIT CIT (A) (A) 24, 24, Mumbai/10592/2017 Mumbai/10592/2017-18 dated 12.10.2022 for AY.2009-10 following 10 following rule of consistency. consistency. 5.3. The appellant submits that the Hon’ble ITAT has reaffirmed this 5.3. The appellant submits that the Hon’ble ITAT has reaffirmed

Income Tax Officer, Pune vs. Ms S S Landmarks, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 977/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.977 & 972/Pun/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2016-17 Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. S. S. Landmarks, Pune Unit U, Shakti Chamber, S.No.77-1/1A/1/3, Sangamwadi, Pune 411 003 Maharashtra Pan : Aadas1463K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 801B(10)Section 80I

Builders (SC) Runwal Multi Housing Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 1015/Pn/2011)(Pune) Pro rata deduction is allowable CIT v ARJ Security Printers 2641TR276 (Delhi) Rule of consistency applies inspite of principle of res judicata. In view of this factual position and the judicial precedents, it is prayed that the orders

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Pune vs. Ms S S Landmarks, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 972/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.977 & 972/Pun/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2016-17 Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. S. S. Landmarks, Pune Unit U, Shakti Chamber, S.No.77-1/1A/1/3, Sangamwadi, Pune 411 003 Maharashtra Pan : Aadas1463K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 801B(10)Section 80I

Builders (SC) Runwal Multi Housing Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 1015/Pn/2011)(Pune) Pro rata deduction is allowable CIT v ARJ Security Printers 2641TR276 (Delhi) Rule of consistency applies inspite of principle of res judicata. In view of this factual position and the judicial precedents, it is prayed that the orders

DCIT, Circle- 8(1), New Delhi vs. E.I. Dupont India P. Ltd., Gurgaon

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

ITA 7454/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumarcorteva Agriscience India Pvt Ltd Vs. Dcit, (Earlier Known As E.I. Dupont P. Circle-11(1), Ltd), 17Th Floor, Tower-C, Dlf New Delhi Cyber Greens, Sector-25A, Phase-3, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaace2462M Dcit, Vs. Corteva Agriscience India Circle-11(1), Pvt Ltd (Earlier Known As E.I. Dupont P. Ltd), 17Th New Delhi Floor, Tower-C, Dlf Cyber Greens, Sector-25A, Phase-3, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaace2462M Assessee By : Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv Shri Pulkit Pandey, Adv Revenue By: Shri Chetan Rao, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 25/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Chetan Rao, CIT DR
Section 144C

availed by the Company from its Associated Enterprises (AES). 3.2 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in disregarding the Rule of Consistency. 3.3 The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the Company is not guided by any motive to evade taxes

E.I. Dupont India P. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 6879/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumarcorteva Agriscience India Pvt Ltd Vs. Dcit, (Earlier Known As E.I. Dupont P. Circle-11(1), Ltd), 17Th Floor, Tower-C, Dlf New Delhi Cyber Greens, Sector-25A, Phase-3, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaace2462M Dcit, Vs. Corteva Agriscience India Circle-11(1), Pvt Ltd (Earlier Known As E.I. Dupont P. Ltd), 17Th New Delhi Floor, Tower-C, Dlf Cyber Greens, Sector-25A, Phase-3, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaace2462M Assessee By : Shri Deepak Chopra, Adv Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv Shri Pulkit Pandey, Adv Revenue By: Shri Chetan Rao, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 25/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/12/2024

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Chetan Rao, CIT DR
Section 144C

availed by the Company from its Associated Enterprises (AES). 3.2 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in disregarding the Rule of Consistency. 3.3 The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the Company is not guided by any motive to evade taxes

Integrated Fire Protection Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1451/KOL/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 37Section 37(1)

earlier years were never disallowed. According to me, even though 'res judicata' is not applicable to the income tax proceedings, but the rule of consistency has to be followed as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang Vs CIT (193 ITR 321). Therefore ... Protection Pvt. Ltd. AY 2019-20 5. The Ld. DR could not point out any distinguishing facts for the year under consideration. Following rule of consistency, the disallowance made by the lower authorities is set aside. Appeal of the assessee stands allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal

ACIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Bombay Footwear Private Limited, Mumbai

Accordingly, all the Grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 94/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji and Shri Ajay BhandariFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 270ASection 45Section 50D

apply in income tax proceedings, nevertheless, where there is no change in the facts and circumstances from the preceding assessment year, the Rule of Consistency cannot be ignored (Re. Distributors Baroda (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India, 155 ITR 120 (SC) and Radhasoami Satsang ... apply in income tax proceedings, nevertheless, where there is no change in the facts and circumstances from the preceding assessment year, the Rule of Consistency cannot be ignored” 15. We find no reason to depart from the above said view taken by the Tribunal in the case of the Assessee

Shree Sidh Balaji Sakh Sahkarita Maryadit, Ujjain vs. Asst Director CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 413/IND/2024[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Indore10 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2019-20 Shree Sidh Balaji Sakh Assistant Director Cpc, Sahkarita Maryadit, Bangalore बनाम/ Ramghat Marg, Vs. Ujjain (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaja57480G Assessee By Ms.Sonam Khandelwal, Adv. Revenue By Shri Sanjeev H.Bhagat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.12.2024

Section 119(2)(a)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

tenable. Accordingly, we direct the AO to allow deduction. The assessee’s appeal is allowed.” 7. To maintain the rule of consistency, we follow the earlier order of the Tribunal and hold that the disallowance made by CPC while processing the return u/s 143(1) for the assessment year