Click Here For Best Books On Taxation & Law. Upto 60% Off On Select Titles. Free Shipping & Pay On Delivery!
 

Click Here To Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter

This section is now closed. Click here for new judgements

Home › All Judgements › CIT vs. Virgo Marketing Pvt. Ltd (Supreme Court)

CIT vs. Virgo Marketing Pvt. Ltd (Supreme Court)

Posted on by editor — 3 Comments ↓
COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: March 2, 2012 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE:
CITATION:

Click here to download the judgement (virgo_marketing_low_tax_effect_circular.pdf)


High Court to consider whether Low Tax Effect Circular has retrospective effect

The Department filed an appeal u/s 260A in 2006 where the tax effect was less than Rs. 10 lakhs. The High Court, relying on Instruction No. 3/2011 Dated 9-2-2011 (which had been held to apply to pending appeals in CIT vs. Delhi Race Club Ltd) dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. The Department challenged the decision on the ground that para 11 of Instruction No. 3/2011 Dated 9-2-2011 made it clear that it would apply only to appeals filed on or after 9.2.2011 and not to appeals filed earlier. HELD by the Supreme Court:

In view of Para 11 of CBDT Instruction No.3/2011 dated 9th February, 2011, liberty is granted to the Department to move the High Court by way of review within four weeks.

See Also: Surya Herbals (SC), CBDT’s letter dated 2.9.2011 & Article

Related Judgements

  1. M/s Ahmed Anis vs. CIT (Supreme Court) 

    Where the assessee had led satisfactory evidence that its business was that of a commission agent and not a trader and 10-11 years had passed, the assessee could not be held responsible for non-appearance of five traders to whom summons … M/s Ahmed Anis vs. CIT (Supreme…
  2. Malayala Manorama vs. CIT (Supreme Court) 

    The AO has no jurisdiction u/s 115J of the Act to go behind the Profit & loss account of the assessee and to make adjustments therein beyond what is expressly provided in s. 115J. An assessee is entitled to provide for depreciation in its books at rates which are…
  3. CIT vs. Gold Coin Health (Supreme Court – Larger Bench) 

    the amendment to Explanation 4 to s. 271(1)(c), though made with effect from 1st April 2003, should be treated as clarificatory and retrospective.Read more ›
  4. Bar of Indian Lawyers vs. D. K. Gandhi (Supreme Court) 

    The State Commission, Delhi, held that services rendered by a Lawyer would not come within the ambit of s. 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as the client executes the power of attorney authorizing the Counsel to do certain acts on his behalf and there is no term…
  5. CIT vs. Emptee Poly-Yarn (Supreme Court) 

    Though the Court has repeatedly asked the department to examine the process applicable to the product in question and not to go only by dictionary meanings, the recommendation is not being followed. Even when the assessee gives an opinion on a given process, the Department does not submit any…
3 comments on “CIT vs. Virgo Marketing Pvt. Ltd (Supreme Court)”
  1. Thirumalesh M, Advocate says:
    March 3, 2012 at 5:03 am

    Karnataka High Court has also taken the same view holding that the Circular dated 9-2-2011 will apply to pending matters. In a very detailed judgment Hon’ble Court has ruled in favour of assessees and has dismissed several appeals filed by revenue and pending. The judgment is in the case of M/s. Ranka & Ranka ITA No. 3191/2005 dated 2-11-2011.

    Reply
  2. Mahendra Gargieya,Advocate says:
    September 3, 2012 at 8:13 am

    For updation of the readers

    List of cases holding the CBDT Circular no.3/2011 dated 09.02.2011 is applicable retrospectively:

    High courts

    CIT vs. Camco Colour Co. (2002) 173 CTR (Bom) 255

    CIT Vs. Pithwa Engg. Works (2005) 197 CTR (Bom) 655

    CIT vs. Ashok Kumar Manibhai Patel & Co. (2008) 214 CTR (MP) 344

    CIT vs. Madhukar K. Inamdar (HUF) (2009) 229 CTR (Bom) 77

    CIT vs. Nanak Ram Jaisighania (2009) 317 ITR 302 (Del)

    CIT vs. P.S. Jain & Co. (2011) 335 ITR 591 (Del)

    CIT vs. Delhi Race Club Ltd. in ITA No. 128/2008 dtd. 3-3-2011 (Del).

    CIT vs. Continental Construction Ltd. (2011) 245 CTR (Del) 319

    CIT vs. Ranka & Ranka (2012) 72 DTR 270 (Kar)

    CIT vs. Smt. Varsha Dilip Kolhe in Tax Appeal No.7 of 2010 dtd. 5-3-2012 (Del)

    ITAT

    Dy. CIT vs. M/s Walchand & Co. Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 6500/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2001-02 dtd. 23-5-2012 (Mum) (trib)

    Dy. CIT vs. Smt. Kokilaben M. Patel in ITA No. 4870/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2002-03 dtd. 23-9-2011 (Mum) (trib)

    Dy. CIT vs. Pankaj M. Patel in ITA No. 4872/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2002-03 dtd. 28-12-2011. (Mum) (trib)

    Reply
  3. Vaibhav says:
    March 7, 2013 at 1:12 pm

    Whether instruction no 3/2011 prescribing the monetary limits applies to wealth tax as well?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*