Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeDirect TaxSupreme Court Order On AY 2015-16 Post Rajeev Bansal Case

Supreme Court Order On AY 2015-16 Post Rajeev Bansal Case

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Supreme Court comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Prasanna B. Varale has dismissed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the Income Tax Department, citing the earlier concession made by the Department in the case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal.

During the hearing, the petitioner-Department submitted that the present SLP may be disposed of in terms of the Supreme Court’s order dated January 17, 2025, passed in Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2), Jaipur vs. R.K. Build Creations Pvt. Ltd.(SLP (C) Diary No. 59625 of 2024). In that matter, the Court had observed:

“Delay condoned.
Having regard to the concession made by the petitioner-Department in the case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal, this Special Leave Petition would not survive for further consideration.
Hence, the Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.”

Following the same reasoning, the Supreme Court dismissed the present SLP, noting that it does not survive for further consideration.

Significantly, the decision hinges on the concession recorded in Rajeev Bansal (supra), where the Additional Solicitor General made submissions, particularly in relation to the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Court, in paragraph 19(e) and (f) of the Rajeev Bansal judgment, had noted the Department’s stand, which effectively set a precedent for the disposal of similar cases.

Case Details

Case Title: ACIT Versus Nehal Ashit Shah

Case No.: SLP 57209/2024

Date: 04-04-2025

Counsel For Appellant: Raghavendra P Shankar

Counsel For Respondent: Sr. Adv. Percy Pardiwalla

Read More: Supreme Court To Hear Petitions Challenging Waqf Amendment Act, 2025 On April 15

Amit Sharma
Amit Sharma
Amit Sharma is the Content Editor at JurisHour. He has been writing about the Indian legal market. He has covered tax & company litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and Various Tribunals. Amit graduated from MLSU Law College with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. from MLSU, Udaipur, Rajasthan. An Advocate in Taxation, and practised in Tribunals as well as Rajasthan High Court and pursued Masters in Constitutional Law. He started out small with little resources but a big plan to take tax legal education to the remotest locations across India and eventually to the world. His vision is to make tax related legal developments accessible to the masses.

Latest articles

Delayed Payment Alone Can’t Trigger Higher Duty on All Packing Machines: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata Bench has held that...

One-to-One Input-Export Correlation Not Required: CESTAT Quashes Recovery of Cenvat Refund

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

Advance Authorisation Exemption Valid and Dept. Failed to Prove Imports Were Wind-Turbine Castings: CESTAT

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

CESTAT Allows CENVAT Credit on Duties Paid at EOU De-bonding

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

More like this

Delayed Payment Alone Can’t Trigger Higher Duty on All Packing Machines: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata Bench has held that...

One-to-One Input-Export Correlation Not Required: CESTAT Quashes Recovery of Cenvat Refund

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

Advance Authorisation Exemption Valid and Dept. Failed to Prove Imports Were Wind-Turbine Castings: CESTAT

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...