Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


V. M. Salgaocar & Bros. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2000) 243 ITR 383/160 CTR 225/110 Taxman 67 (SC)

S.261 : Appeal to Supreme Court – Doctrine of merger – Dismissal of special leave petition – Dismissal of Appeal – Grant of interest free loan or loan at a concessional rate of interest does not result in benefit or perquisite to the employee [S. 17(2) 40A(5), Constitution of India , Art, 133, 136 ]

Shiv Raj Gupta v. CIT (2020) 425 ITR 420/315 CTR 601/117 taxmann.com 871 (SC)

S.260A : Appeal to High Court – Before pronouncing judgment the substantial question of law must be formulated – If the High Court is of the view that an appeal also involves any other substantial question of law other than that formulated earlier, it should for reasons to be recorded, first formulate the question and then hear the same – amount received towards non-compete covenant is a capital receipt not chargeable to tax [ S.4 , 28(ii)(a), 260A(4) , Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, S.100 ]

Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT (2007) 295 ITR 466/165 Taxman 307/213 CTR 425 (SC)

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal – Rectification of mistake apparent from record – Not considering the decision of a co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal is a mistake apparent from records.

ACIT v. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (2008) 305 ITR 227/12 DTR 346/219 CTR 90/173 Taxman 322 (SC)

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal – Rectification of mistake apparent from the record – Effect of not considering decision of Jurisdictional High Court / Supreme Court

Nisha Synthetics Ltd. v CIT (2017) 145 DTR 345/291 CTR 328 (SC)

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal – Rectification of mistake apparent from the record – Non consideration of paper book filed is a mistake apparent from the record – Direction to hear the appeal afresh considering the documents already filed in the paper book

Khalid Automobiles v. UOI (1995) Supp.(4) SCC 652/1997 96 ELT 509 (SC) MANU/SC/1518/1995

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal – Precedent – Judicial discipline demands that subordinate authorities shall accept the decisions of Tribunal as binding precedent [ Constitution of India , Art . 136 , Customs Act , 1962 ,S 17, 130E (b) ]

Gammon India Ltd. v. CCES, Mumbai 2011 (269) ELT 289 (SC)/(2011) 12 SCC 499/MANU/SC/0739/2011

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal – Duties – Precedent – Judicial discipline – Orders of the constitutional bench binding on subsequent bench – All courts and Tribunals shall follow the judicial discipline in letter and spirit [Customs Act , 1962 ,S,. 25, 130E (b) . Central Excise Act, 1944 , S. 35]

MCorp Global Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2009) 309 ITR 434/178 Taxman 347/222 CTR 110/19 DTR 153/211 Taxation 197 (SC)/3 SCC 420

S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal – Power of enhancement – Tribunal has no power of enhancement .

CIT v. Manick Sons (1969) 74 ITR 1 (SC)

S.254(1) : Appellate Tribunal – Powers – No power to give any directions with respect to an assessment year not covered by the appeal. [ Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, S.33(4) ]

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383/157 CTR 249 (SC)

S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal – Powers – Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide a question of law raised for the first time before it.