Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Vidya Shankar Jaiswal v. ITO (2025) 305 Taxman 83 / 343 CTR 39 / 246 DTR 207 (SC)

S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Delay of 166 days-Justice-oriented approach-Delay condoned-Tribunal directed to decide appeal on merits.[S. 254(1), Art. 136]

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. ITO (2025) 171 taxmann.com 469 / 343 CTR 705 / 247 DTR 321 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 239 : Refunds-Limitation-Refund of tax erroneously withheld-CBDT Circular ultra vires-Refund cannot be denied.[S. 119(2), 195, 237, Art. 226]

PCIT v. Vivek Krishnamoorthy (2025) 343 CTR 625 / 247 DTR 449 (Karn)(HC) Editorial: Vivek Krishnamoorthy v. PCIT (WP No. 16991 of 2023, dt. 2-11-2023) (Karn)(HC), Single Judge affirmed.

S. 237: Refunds-Condonation of delay-Reasonable cause-Date of claim in return relevant-Subsequent formal application immaterial-Refund allowed. [S. 119(2)(b), 139, Art. 226]

Vaibhav Goel v. DCIT (2025) 343 CTR 689 / 248 DTR 49 (SC) Editorial : Tehri Iron & Steel Castings Ltd dt. 25-11-2021(CD)

S. 226 : Collection and recovery-Modes of recovery-Resolution Plan under IBC-Tax liability not shown as contingent liability-Subsequent demand invalid. [S. 154, IBC 2016 S. 31(1), 61, 62, Art. 136]

DCIT v. Central Coalfields Ltd. (2025) 304 Taxman 217 / 343 CTR 657 / 248 DTR 25 (Jharkhand)(HC)

S. 206C: Collection at source-Trading-Forest produce-Scrap-Declarant in Form 27C is purchaser and not seller-Revenue’s contention rejected. [S. 206C(1A), R. 37C, Form 27C]

Gayatri Snehal Rao v. ITO (2024) 168 taxmann.com 466 / (2025) 343 CTR 696 / 248 DTR 29 (Guj)(HC) Shobhan Shantilal Doshi v.ITO 168 taxmann.com 466 / (2025) 343 CTR 696 / 248 DTR 29 (Guj)(HC)

S. 205 : Deduction at source-Bar against direct demand-Employer failed to deposit TDS deducted from salary-Demand cannot be raised against employee-Directions to CBDT to harassment in future-Technology/software must be rectified. [S. 119, 192, Art. 226]

Preethi V. (Smt.) v. ITO (2025) 343 CTR 390 / 247 DTR 21 / 171 taxmann.com 100 (Karn)(HC) Editorial : Appeal affirmed by division bench, ITO v. Preethi V. (Smt) (2025) 343 CTR 385 / 247 DTR 16 / 170 Taxmann.com 673 (Karn)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice in name of deceased-Invalid-No statutory obligation on deceased to intimate department. [S. 149(1)(b), 159(2)(b), Art. 226]

ITO v. Preethi V. (Smt) (2025) 343 CTR 385 / 247 DTR 16 / 170 Taxmann.com 673 (Karn)(HC) Editorial : Preethi V. (Smt.) v. ITO (2025) 343 CTR 390 / 247 DTR 21 / 171 taxmann.com 100 (Karn)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice issued in name of deceased-Proceedings void-No revival against legal heirs after limitation-Order of single judge is affirmed. [S. 149, 159, Art. 226]

Shree Bhavani Power Projects (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 165 Taxmann.com 733 / (2025) 343 CTR 325 / 247 DTR 217 / 475 ITR 155 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-No escapement of income-Mere non-uploading of audit report not fatal-Notice and reassessment quashed-Reassessment beyond six years-Notice and order disposing the objection was quashed. [S. 80IA(7), 148, Form 10CCB, Art. 226]

Tata Communications Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 304 Taxman 476 / 343 CTR 641 / 247 DTR 489 (Bom)(HC)

S. 147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Guarantee fee-No fresh tangible material referred to in reasons-Reassessment notice quashed. [S. 143(3), 148, Art. 226]