Section 153(1) of the Income Tax Act
The decision most relied on for Section 153(1) is 21. In SB Gurbaksh Singh v. Union of India (2 SCC 181), cited in 318 of the 183 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.
Leading authorities on Section 153(1)
If an issue has been decided by a competent court or bench, and that decision remains undisturbed by a higher court, subsequent appeals on the same issue can be dismissed as being covered by the earlier judgment, underscoring judicial discipline.
An Income-tax Tribunal, operating anywhere in the country, must respect and follow the law laid down by any High Court, even if it is a non-jurisdictional High Court, as long as there is no contrary decision from another High Court on that specific legal point. The law declared by such a High Court is considered the final law of the land for the Tribunal.
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.
Courts must interpret statutes by reading the entire enactment as a whole to ascertain legislative intent, rejecting constructions that create inconsistency, render any provision otiose or a "dead letter," or defeat the plain intention of the legislature.
Statutory authorities must exercise their suo motu or revisional powers within a reasonable period, even if the governing statute does not prescribe a specific limitation period. What constitutes a 'reasonable period' depends on the nature of the statute, the rights and liabilities involved, and other relevant factors.
The legislature is presumed not to enact provisions that defeat the purpose of other related provisions or take away with one hand what it gives with the other, a principle applied in the interpretation of tax statutes.
The Supreme Court holds that legislative intent must be ascertained by reading the statute as a whole, construing one provision with reference to others to ensure a consistent enactment. Courts must consider the entire statute and its setting, not just the specific clauses, even if the language used has some inexactitude.
Judgments on Section 153(1)
Showing 1–20 of 183 · Page 1 of 10
