THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME TAX) vs. TIGER GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL II HOLDINGS

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

263 OF 2026 [Arising out of SLP (C) No. 2565 of 2026] [Arising out of SLP (C) Diary No. 1260 of 2025] THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME TAX) AND OTHERS .... APPELLANT(S) VERSUS TIGER GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL IV HOLDINGS .... RESPONDENT(S) Digitally signed by CHANDRESH Date: 2026.01.20 10:13:19 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified 2 WITH CIVIL APPEAL

THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

263 of the IT Act and interfered with the assessment orders. The CIT held that the appellant was not entitled to the deduction of the      Civil Appeal No.3291­3294 of 2009, etc. Page 4 of 45 interest paid by it for the broken period.  The Commissioner relied upon a decision of this Court in the case of  Vijaya Bank

THE MAVILAYI SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CALICUT

Bench: Us, The Assessing Officer Denied Their Claims For Deduction, Relying Upon Section 80P(4) Of The It Act, Holding That As Per The Audited Receipt & 2

263 of the IT Act, it was held that the revisional authority was justified in saying that an inquiry has to be conducted into the factual situation as to whether a co-operative bank is in fact conducting business as a co-operative bank and not as a primary agricultural credit society, and depending upon whether this

UCO BANK vs. COMM.OF INCOME TAX, WEST BENGAL

263 of the Income-tax Act holding that when the assessment was completed, the only paper available was the Board’s circular dated 9th October, 1984 and, therefore, it cannot be said that the IAC’s order of assessment not taxing the interest in suspense of Rs.49,15,435/- in view of that circular was erroneous and prejudicial

SHABINA ABRAHAM vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS

price is the sole consideration for the sale:” (4) For the purposes of this section, - (a) “assessee” means the person who is liable to pay the duty of excise under this Act and includes his agent;” 11. Recovery of sums due to Government. - In respect of duty and any other sums of any kind payable to the Central Government under

INDUSIND MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS NEW DELHI

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

263 Civil Appeal No. 2498 of 2018 Indusind Media & Communications Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi 10 Customs Act and the appellant will also be liable for penalty.” In the premises, by Order under appeal, the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority only for the purpose of recomputing the differential duty in the light of its conclusion that

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADRAS vs. K. R. M. T. T. THIAGARAJA CHETTY & CO

transference to the interest register from what might be regarded as a suspense account. The Privy Council held that there was nothing illegel or contrary to principle in the computation arrived by the Income-tax Officer. The High Court under section 66(1) had to decide the question of law raised by the first question and decided it against