“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

DCIT (It) -1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. The Bank of Nova Scotia, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4899/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.4981/मुं/2017 (िन.व.2010-11) आअसं.3065/मुं/2018 (िन.व.2011-12) आअसं.820/मुं/2019(िन.व.2012-13) आअसं.863/मुं/2022 (िन.व.2013-14) The Bank Of Nova Scotia, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaacb-1536-H ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Additional Director Of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3,/Dcit (It) 1(2)(1)Mumbai Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ....."ितवादी/Respondent आअसं.4899/मुं/2017 (िन.व. 2010-11) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax,(It)-1(2),Mumbai Room No.1811, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Bank Of Nova Scotia, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 020. Pan: Aaacb-1536-H ....."ितवादी/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Anil Sant, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar and Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Sr. AR

same transactions were accepted by the Id. TPO upto A Y2012-13 in the case of the assessee Hence, even going by the rule of consistency as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT [1992] 60 Taxman 248/193

DCIT-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ecgc Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3813/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R

Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234B

reserves which were added to the balance of profits were not expenditure." 3.3.2 One more aspect,to be considered here, is the rule of consistency. As per the taxation jurisprudence, if basic facts remain same, orders for the earlier year should followe. It is said that principles of res judicata

DCIT-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ecgc Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3812/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R

Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234Section 234B

Ecgc Limited, Ecgc Bhawan vs. ACIT, New Marine Lines Mumbai

ITA 3551/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R

Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234Section 234B

Ecgc Limited, Ecgc Bhawan vs. ACIT, New Marine Lines Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3544/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R

Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234B

Ecgc Limited, Ecgc Bhawan vs. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3543/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R

Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234B

Ecgc Limited, Ecgc Bhawan vs. AO, New Marine Lines, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3542/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, D.R

Section 10(38)Section 14ASection 234B

Sungard Availability Services Lp, Usa vs. Income Tax Officer (It), Ward 4, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 987/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.987/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Sungard Availability Services Lp, The Income Tax C/O.Suite 320, 565 Ease V Officer(It), Swedesford Road, Wayne, S Ward-4, Pune. Pennsylyania19087, Usa. B.O.Bhavan, Sector No.17, Pune Satara Road, Parvati, Pune – 411009. Pan: Abtfs0527J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Siddesh Chaugule – Ar Revenue By Shri Ganesh Bare – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 11.07.2023 Passed By Income Tax Officer(It), Ward-4, Pune Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, Passed In Pursuance To Directions Issued By Dispute Resolution Panel(Drp) Under Section 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 27.06.2023.The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : Sungard Availability Services Lp, Usa [A]

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 9Section 9(1)(vii)Section 90(2)

India. The Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance fails accordingly.” 7. Since the facts are same for the current year also, following the rule of consistency, we hold that the assessee is entitled for benefit of “India USA DTAA.” and since the condition of ‘make available’ has not been satisfied

M/S. Linde India Limited (Formerly Boc India Limited), Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 12(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 381/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 154Section 92CSection 92C(3)

rejection of comparables of the ld. TPO. Accordingly the observation of the Hon’ble DRP is duly reproduced as below: - “2. Principle of Rule of Consistency not applied by the ld. TPO 2.1.The ld. TPO erred in making a transfer pricing adjustment to the tune ... Fees (TAF) 7. Purchase of 6,86,42,156.58 Capital/Fixed Assets 25,61,96,698.11 2.2. The TPO erred in not applying the Rule of Consistency during the transfer pricing proceedings without appreciating that the fact pattern of the case is same as the preceding years. 2.3. The TPO disregarded

DCIT, (Exemptions), Hyderabad vs. National Fisheries Development Board, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 244/HYD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)

assessee complied with the conditions under section 11 of the Act to avail the benefit thereunder? According to him, the reference to the rule of consistency under Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT (1992) 60 Taxman 248 (SC) is misplaced. Firstly, he contended that there is no record available before ... earlier assessment years, or such assessments were under section 143(1) or 143(3) of the Act. Secondly he submitted that rule of consistency cannot be extended to apply to the cases where there was a patent mistake committed by the learned Assessing Officer in the earlier years

ACIT Circle-7(1), New Delhi vs. Deeksha Holding Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 9/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17 Acit Vs. M/S. Deeksha Holding Ltd. Circle – 7 (1) 26-27, Ground Floor, World New Delhi Trade Centre, Barakhamba Line, New Delhi-110001 Pan No.Aaacd1703G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. T. James Singson, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. U.N. Marwah, Ca Sh. Praveen Goel, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 13/02/2024 Order Per N. K. Billaiya, Am:

Section 14ASection 68

considering the facts and the submissions the CIT(A) found that in the earlier years no such disallowances were made and following the rule of consistency and also finding that the books of account have been thoroughly supported by bills and vouchers, the addition was deleted. 18. The DR could

Anamika Kala Sangam, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1272/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J.M. ThardFor Respondent: Shri L.N. Dash, Addl. CIT, D/R

Section 11Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

Sangam 2 4. FOR that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) was wrong and unjustified in not accepting the appellant as mutual association ignoring the rule of consistency. 5. FOR that the appellant craves leave to alter, amend, modify any of the grounds and/or take additional grounds before or at the time

ACIT Circle-26(2), New Delhi vs. Vihaan Networks Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

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

ITA 4064/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2011-12 Acit,Circle-26(2) Vs. Vihaan Networks Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi. A-60, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-01, New Delhi – 110 028 Pan Aaccr2460C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ritesh Bajaj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43B

Without bringing on record anything new and adverse to take a different view in the subsequent year is against the Rule of consistency. 7.4 The Ld. CIT(A) has found that invoices amounting to Rs. 1.72 crores were produced before the Ld. AO during the assessment proceedings. That

ACIT-1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1995/MUM/2023[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 80I

stay of operation of the order of the Tribunal. The principle of judicial discipline is to be followed keeping in view the rule of consistency to keep the matter alive till the issue attains finality by the High Court or Supreme Court. In case no addition/ disallowance are made

ACIT-1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1994/MUM/2023[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 80I

Sarva Capital Llc, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle International Tax 3(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2073/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nirbhay Mehta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B.Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 112Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 270A

assessments under section 143(3) of the Act has allowed Treaty benefits to the assessee in respect of capital gain. Thus, he submitted, rule of consistency has to be applied. 9. In so far as the merits of the issue is concerned, learned counsel submitted, though, the assessee on conservative

ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Ncc Limited, Hyderabad

Accordingly, we delete the same. Thus, this ground is partly allowed

ITA 80/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA &For Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)

Therefore, in the absence of any stay of the order passed by the Tribunal, the rule of consistency requires this Tribunal to follow the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal rendered in the similar facts. In fact, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Honda ... only wrong but is required to be deprecated in strong terms being highly objectionable.” 37. In view of the above, the rule of consistency is required to be maintained in the conduct of the Revenue. Further there is no change in the facts for the A.Ys under consideration. In fact