Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Income Tax Act

49 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSARversusM/S SHIV PRAKASH JANAK RAJ AND CO. PVT. LTD.

1996 INSC 112730 September 1996Case Partly allowed

The assessee company had advanced a loan to a firm whose partners were also its shareholders and directors. Interest was charged on the loan in the 1966-67 and 1967-68 assessment years, establishing it as an interest‑bearing loan. For the 1968-69 assessment year the company passed a resolution before the end of its acc

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHIversusPARASRAMPURIA SYNTHETICS LTD.

2001 INSC 40930 August 2001Appeal(s) allowed

Parasrampuria Synthetic Ltd imported a large number of printed drawings, designs and plans under a foreign technology‑transfer agreement for setting up a polyester plant. The importer claimed that the items fell within Serial No. 10 of Customs Notification No. 25/95 (dated 16‑03‑1995), which provides a nil rate of duty

KETAN V. PAREKHversusSPECIAL DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ANOTHER.

2011 INSC 82529 November 2011Dismissed

The Special Director of Enforcement imposed a penalty on Ketan V. Parekh and others under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999. The appellants filed appeals under Section 35 of the Act and sought condonation of a 1,056‑day delay, arguing that the time spent pursuing writ petitions in the Delhi High Court should be

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHIversusDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

2001 INSC 58729 November 2001Dismissed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) failed to deduct tax at source on interest paid to flat buyers, leading to a tax demand for assessment years 1987-88, 1988-89 and 1989-90. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal set aside the assessments, held the payments were not "interest" within Section 2(28A), and ordered a refund.

STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHERversusTHE L.R.C.G. AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 81829 August 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The Gujarat High Court, in a public‑interest litigation, directed the State to compensate trusts and institutions for religious places damaged in the 2002 communal riots and appointed special officers to assess claims. The State responded by framing an ex‑gratia scheme limiting assistance to Rs 50,000 per place, subjec

C. VENKATACHALAMversusAJITKUMAR C. SHAH AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 61829 August 2011Dismissed

Two consumer complaints were filed before the South Mumbai District Consumer Forum, and the opposite parties objected to the appearance of an authorized agent who was not an advocate. The High Court held that the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 permits parties to be represented by authorized agents and that this does not

ASSISTANT COMMERCIAL TAXES OFFICERversusM/S MAKKAD PLASTIC AGENCIES

2011 INSC 23529 March 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Sales Tax Assessing Officer had assessed M/s Makkad Plastic Agencies at a 10% rate, which was later set aside by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and then restored by the Rajasthan Taxation Board. The assessee filed a rectification application under Section 37 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, prompt

COMMERCIAL TAXES OFFICERversusM/S. BOMBAY MACHINERY STORE

2020 INSC 36827 April 2020Dismissed

The Commercial Taxes Officer challenged the exemption claimed by M/s Bombay Machinery Store under Section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, arguing that the State’s circulars imposed a 30‑day time‑limit after which goods retained by a carrier were deemed to be constructively delivered, converting the inter‑state

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusK. K. DHAWAN

1993 INSC 2227 January 1993Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, an Income Tax Officer, was charged under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 for completing nine tax assessments in an irregular, hasty manner allegedly to confer undue favour, thereby violating Rules 3(1)(i)-(iii) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct

MANIK LAL MAJUMDAR AND ORS.versusGOURANGA CHANDRA DEY AND ORS.

2004 INSC 13926 February 2004Matter referred to larger bench

The tenants (appellants) were ordered by the Rent Control Court to vacate premises for default in rent payment. They appealed under Section 20 of the Tripura Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1975, but had not deposited the arrears of rent required by Section 13(1). The lower courts held the appeal inadmissible,

DENA BANKversusBHIKHABHAI PRABHUDAS PAREKH AND CO. AND ORS.

2000 INSC 24525 April 2000Dismissed

Dena Bank had taken a mortgage over the property of the partnership firm Mis Bhikhabhai Prabhudas Parekh & Co. and its partners. While the suit was pending, the State of Karnataka attached and auctioned the mortgaged property to recover arrears of sales tax. The trial court granted a decree to the bank but dismissed th

KARAMCHAND PREMCHAND PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUJARAT

1993 INSC 6825 February 1993Dismissed

Karamchand Premchand Pvt. Ltd. set aside Rs 4,50,000 as a provision for a possible tax liability under Section 23A of the Income‑Tax Act, 1922. The company later claimed that this amount was a reserve and should be included in its capital for the purposes of Rule 1 of the Second Schedule of the Super Profits Tax Act, 1

CHAIRMAN, M.P. ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS.versusSHIV NARAYAN AND ANR.

2005 INSC 38024 August 2005Matter referred to larger bench

The Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board classified a lawyer's office as a commercial establishment and demanded commercial tariff for electricity consumption. The landlord, who owned the premises, challenged the demand in the High Court, which held that a lawyer's office is not a commercial establishment and the commercia

CENTRAL COAL FIELDS LTD. ETC.versusBHUBANESWAR SINGH & ORS.

1984 INSC 15423 August 1984Dismissed

The partnership firm that owned the Tariya coking coal mine had its management taken over by the Central Government in October 1971 under the Emergency Ordinance, later replaced by the Management Act. The Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1971 extinguished the owners' title effective 1 May 1972 and provided comp

RANGNATH HARIDASversusDR. SHRIKANT B. HEGDE

2006 INSC 53922 August 2006Disposed off

The respondent purchased a flat from the appellant under an agreement dated 16 September 1985 and later filed a suit for specific performance. During the suit the parties executed a consent decree on 1 November 1991, confirming the original agreement and setting reciprocal obligations: the appellant to hand over the fl

GOWRISHANKAR AND ANR.versusJOSHI AMBA SHANKAR FAMILY TRUST AND ORS.

1996 INSC 29422 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Joshi Ambashankar Family Trust, a charitable trust, sought High Court permission to sell a property after obtaining a modification order allowing sale with court approval and 3/4 trustee concurrence. While the trustees received an offer of Rs.9 lakh from a group of purchasers, the appellants (Gowrishankar and other

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusM/S ABHILASH JEWELLERY

2009 INSC 5522 January 2009Appeal(s) allowed

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. denied a claim by M/s Abhilash Jewellery for loss of gold that occurred while the jewellery was in the custody of an apprentice. The insurance policy covered loss while in the custody of the insured, his partner or his employees. The dispute turned on whether an apprentice qualifies as an "

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, GUJARATversusVIMLABEN VADILAL MEHTA

1983 INSC 15621 October 1983Dismissed

The Gujarat Commissioner of Wealth Tax appealed against a decision allowing Shri Vadilal Mehta to deduct certain tax liabilities in computing his net wealth for the 1964-65 wealth‑tax assessment year. The assessee sought deductions for income‑tax, wealth‑tax and gift‑tax liabilities that were quantified by assessment o

COMMNR, SALES TAX, U.P.versusM/S BHARAT BONE MILL

2007 INSC 16820 February 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bharat Bone Mill, manufactures crushed bone and argued that the product should be classified as a fertilizer and therefore exempt from Uttar Pradesh sales tax under the state's exemption notifications. The State had earlier exempted fertilizers (including chemical fertilizers) but later taxed "bone to co

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, BIHAR, PATNAversusMAHARAJA KUMAR KAMAL SINGH

1984 INSC 3820 February 1984Dismissed

The Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Bihar appealed against the Patna High Court’s decision that Maharaja Kumar Kamal Singh’s right to receive compensation under the Bihar Land Reforms Act should be valued at nil because of arrears of agricultural income‑tax. The central issue was whether such tax arrears could be deducted

B. PRABHAKAR RAD & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. ETC .ETC.

1985 INSC 17819 August 1985Dismissed

The Andhra Pradesh government reduced the superannuation age for its employees from 58 to 55 years in 1983 and later attempted to reverse the decision by raising it back to 58 years through Ordinance No.24 of 1984 and Act No.3 of 1985. A large number of employees who had been forced to retire under the 55‑year rule cha

V. S. KUTIAN PILLAIversusRAMAKRISHNAN & ANR.

1979 INSC 18618 September 1979Dismissed

The petitioners, office bearers of a charitable Sabha, challenged a search warrant issued under Section 93(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, on the ground that it violated the constitutional protection against self‑incrimination under Article 20(3). The Supreme Court examined whether a general search of pr

MIS. PSI DATA SYSTEMS LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

1996 INSC 150317 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the value of tangible software (discs, floppies, CD‑ROMs) sold together with a computer should be included in the assessable value of the computer for excise duty. The Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal had held that the computer system and its software formed a singl

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusW.N. CHADHA

1992 INSC 34717 December 1992Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the Union of India's and CBI's challenge to a Delhi High Court order that quashed the FIR registered against W.N. Chadha in the Bofors scandal and set aside the letters rogatory issued to Swiss authorities. The Court held that the FIR disclosed a prima facie offence and that the High Court ha

KU. SONIA BHATIAversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

1981 INSC 6917 March 1981Dismissed

The appellant, Sonia Bhatia, claimed ownership of 80 bighas of land gifted to her by her grandfather on 28 January 1972, after the statutory cut‑off date of 24 January 1971 under the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. The Prescribed Authority ignored the gift under Section 5(6), treating it

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, U.P.versusLAXMI SUGAR & OIL MILLS LTD.

1986 INSC 13816 July 1986Dismissed

Laxmi Sugar & Oil Mills Ltd. had debited Rs 8,16,000 as a provision for additional cane price payable to cane‑growers under the Sugarcane Price Control Order, 1955, and shown it under "Current liabilities and provisions". The amount was later reversed and no actual payment was made. The Income‑Tax Officer excluded the

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, HYDERABADversusTRUSTEES OF HEH

2003 INSC 23216 April 2003Dismissed

The beneficiaries of the H.E.H. Nizam Jewellery Trust valued their interest in the trust's jewellery based on a valuer's report. The Commissioner of Wealth Tax challenged this valuation, arguing that the estate duty payable on the deemed death of the life tenant had been incorrectly deducted, among other objections. Th

S.A. KINI & ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 9016 April 1985Dismissed

The petitioners, senior officers of the Canara Bank Officers' Association, alleged that senior bank officials forced bank staff to collect donations and sell greeting cards for the Canara Bank Relief and Welfare Society and the Association's Trust Fund, claiming coercion and victimisation. The Bombay High Court dismiss

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,versusVIKRAM COTTON MILLS LTD.

1987 INSC 37715 December 1987Dismissed

Vikram Cotton Mills Ltd., a textile manufacturer, incurred heavy losses and ceased production in 1953. In 1956, under a court‑approved scheme, its plant and machinery were leased to General Fibres Dealers for Rs 2.5 lakh per year for ten years (renewable) to generate income for creditors and enable future reconstructio

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHIversusRISHI RAJ JAIN AND ANR.

2006 INSC 61514 September 2006Disposed off

The respondent, owner of a 2.5‑acre farmhouse in the agricultural green belt of Delhi, constructed a dwelling house on the land. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) levied General Tax under Section 115 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, treating the entire farm as taxable. The High Court directed that f

RAJ KUMARversusDIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & ORS.

2016 INSC 31813 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a permanent driver at DAV Public School, was declared surplus and retrenched by the school’s Managing Committee in 2003. The school served a notice under Section 25F(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act but failed to send the statutory notice to the appropriate government authority under Section 25F(c) and

THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, GUJARAT, AHMEDABADversusKANTILAL MANILAL ETC. ETC.

1985 INSC 5613 March 1985Dismissed

The assessee sought to deduct wealth‑tax liabilities of Rs 22,679 (assessment year 1960‑61) and Rs 39,692 (assessment year 1961‑62) while computing net wealth for the valuation dates of 31 March 1961 and 31 March 1962. The Wealth Tax Officer rejected the claim, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed part of it, a

COMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX, U.P. AND ANR.versusM/S. KAJARIA CERAMICS LTD.

2005 INSC 28812 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. appealed against the eligibility certificate granted to Mis. Kajaria Ceramics Ltd. for exemption from trade tax under the 1991 Notification. The company had expanded its ceramic tile plant in three stages between 1990 and 1994, increasing capacity from 12,000 TPA to 60,000 TPA, and c

MANIK LAL MAJUMDAR AND ORS.versusGOURANGA CHANDRA DEY AND ORS.

2005 INSC 2912 January 2005Disposed off

The landlord filed an eviction petition under Section 12 of the Tripura Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1975 alleging non‑payment of rent and a bona‑fide requirement. The Rent Control Court found the tenants in arrears and ordered eviction; the tenants’ appeal under Section 20 was dismissed by the Civil Judge b

V.S.M.R. JAGDISHCHANDRAN (DEAD) BY LRSversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADRAS

1997 INSC 5619 July 1997Dismissed

The appellant sold a house that was mortgaged and the mortgage debt was discharged by the buyer from the sale proceeds. The appellant argued that the amount used to clear the mortgage should be treated as part of the cost of acquisition or as an improvement, thereby reducing the capital gains tax of Rs.68,400 computed

AS. NARA YANA DEEKSHITULU ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

1997 INSC 5099 May 1997Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, particularly its provisions abolishing hereditary rights of Archakas and other temple officials. It held that such abolition was not unconstitutional and that the Act's welf

EMPIRE JUTE CO. LID.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

1980 INSC 1269 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Empire Jute Co., a member of the Indian Jute Mills Association, purchased loom‑hours from four other mills under a quinquennial working‑time agreement that limited weekly loom operation. The company claimed Rs 2,03,255 as a revenue expense deductible under section 10(2)(xv) of the Income‑Tax Act, arguing that the payme

S.P. MITTAL ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 818 November 1982Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Auroville (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1980, which authorised the Government of India to take over the management of the Auroville township for a limited period due to alleged mismanagement and fund diversion by the Sri Aurobindo Society. The petitioners chal

PRADEEP KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusPOST MASTER GENERAL AND OTHERS

2022 INSC 1567 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants purchased Kisan Vikas Patras (KVPs) in joint names and, relying on an agent named Rukhsana, handed the certificates to her for transfer. Rukhsana encashed the KVPs at a different post office and received Rs. 25,54,000 in cash, which she kept. The appellants filed a consumer complaint; the NCDRC dismissed

COMMISSIONER OF TRADE AND TAXES AND ORS.versusMIS AHLUWALIA CONTRACTS (INDIA) LTD.

2017 INSC 9984 October 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the Delhi Tax Compliance Achievement Scheme (Amnesty Scheme) under Section 107 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004. The Additional Commissioner, acting as the "Designated Authority", issued a show‑cause notice under clause 8 of the Scheme alleging false declaration by MIS Ahluwalia Contracts. The

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.versusM/S. SHREYANS INDUS LTD. ETC.

2016 INSC 2434 March 2016Dismissed

The State of Punjab appealed against the High Court’s decision that the Commissioner of Excise and Taxation could not extend the three‑year limitation period for passing a sales‑tax assessment after that period had expired. The assessee, M/s Shreyans Indus Ltd., had filed returns for assessment years 2000‑01 to 2003‑04

DR. VINOD BHANDARIversusSTATE OF M.P.

2015 INSC 954 February 2015

Dr. Vinod Bhandari, Managing Director of a medical institute, was alleged to have conspired with Vyapam officials and middlemen to secure illegal admissions for undeserving candidates into MBBS courses, involving large sums of money and fraud. He was arrested in January 2014 and his bail applications were rejected by t

D. PARRY (INDIA) LTD.versusASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHENNAI

2005 INSC 2473 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed

E.I.D. Parry (India) Ltd., a sugar manufacturer, purchased sugarcane at a statutory minimum price and an additional price under Clause 5‑A of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966. The additional price could be determined only after the sugar year ended, so the company paid an advance on that price, recorded only the min

FEDERATION OF HOTEL & RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION OF INDIA, ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1989 INSC 1662 May 1989Dismissed

The Federation of Hotel & Restaurant Association of India and other hotel operators challenged the Expenditure Tax Act, 1987, alleging that Parliament lacked legislative competence and that the Act violated Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) by arbitrarily classifying hotels based on a Rs.400 per day room charge and imposing an

PAUL BROTHERS (TAILORING DIVISION) AND ORS. ETC.versusASHIM KUMAR MANDAL AND ORS. ETC.

1990 INSC 1192 April 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court dealt with the aftermath of the Sanchaita Investment Company case, where a Commissioner was appointed to attach and sell properties of the defunct firm. One such property, house No. 52/1/IB, was sold on an "as is where is" basis to Ashim Kumar Mandal and others, who then sought vacant possession. The

M/S KOTHARI INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION LTD.versusTAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD & ANR.

2010 INSC 6661 October 2010Matter referred to larger bench

The appellants, Kothari Industrial Corporation Ltd. and others, set up new industrial units attracted by a five‑year tariff concession under the Tamil Nadu Revision of Tariff Rates on Supply of Electrical Energy Act, 1978. A later notification (30‑April‑1982) altered the concession, stipulating it would not apply once

M/S. SONEBHADRA FUELSversusCOMMISSIONER, TRADE TAX, U.P. LUCKNOW

2006 INSC 4831 August 2006

M/S Sonebhadra Fuels, which manufactures coal briquettes (coal tikli), sought exemption/rebate of sales tax on the basis that the briquettes were the same commodity as coal, which had already been taxed. The Assessing Authority, Appellate Authority and the Sales Tax Tribunal rejected the claim, holding the briquettes t

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search