WebDec 17, 2002 · Hindustan Bulk Carriers Arijit Pasayat, J.— A question of seminal importance relating to the period for which interest in terms of Section 234-B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) can be levied when the Settlement Commission (in short “the Commission”) passes an order under Section 245-D of the Act, is the subject-matter ... WebNov 6, 2024 · As observed by Hon‟ble Supreme Court, in the case of CIT Vs Hindustan Bulk Carriers [(2003) 259 ITR 449 (SC)], “A construction which reduces the statute to a futility has to be avoided. A statute or any enacting provision therein must be so construed as to make it effective and operative on the principle expressed in maxim us res magi’s ...
Ajay Kumar Jain v. Acit . Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
WebCommissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S. Hindustan Bulk Carriers on 17 December, 2002 Author: A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat CASE NO.: PETITIONER: Commissioner of … WebOct 11, 2024 · CIT vs Hindustan Bulk Carriers … but can waive or reduce interest u/s 220(2A) if prescribed conditions are satisfied. Rectification of order: section 245D(6B): Within a period of 6 months from the end of month in which order was passed; grand master thawn
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S. Hindustan Bulk …
Web1 CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57, p. 74. 2) The provision of one section cannot be used to defeat the provision contained in another unless the court, despite all its effort, is unable to find a way to reconcile their differences.2 3) When it is impossible to completely reconcile the differences in contradictory provisions, the ... WebJun 19, 2015 · The A.O., however, referred to Apex Court judgment in case of CIT vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers and charged interest. 5. The assessee preferred an appeal to CIT(A) and it was held that the interest could not be levied in block assessment by placing reference to section 158BF of the Act. Apex Court judgment in case of CIT vs. … WebDec 21, 2024 · Hindustan Bulk Carrier: “While interpreting, the court has a duty to avoid a “head-on clash” at all costs between two sections of the same act The interpretation should be done such that the provision of one section doesn’t defeat the purpose of another unless it is impossible to effect a reconciliation between them. grand master training