Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


PCIT v. MD Industries (P.) Ltd. (2025) 307 Taxman 301 (SC) Editorial : PCIT v.MD Industries (P) Ltd ([2025] 172 taxmann.com 91 / 473 ITR 744 (Guj) (HC)

S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Pendency of application before Settlement Commission-Tribunal condoned the delay and directed the CIT(A) to decide on the merits-High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal-SLP of revenue dismissed. [S. 245F(2), Art. 136]

C.I. Builders (P.) Ltd. v. Pr. CIT (2025) 307 Taxman 2 / (2026) 484 ITR 192 (SC) Editorial: C.I. Builders (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 305 Taxman 217 (MP) (HC)

S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Condonation of delay-Delay of six to seven years-Documents were handed over to the counsel-Mistake of counsel-High Court affirming the order of the Tribunal held that there is no general proposition that mistake of counsel by itself is always a sufficient ground for condonation of delay-Order of High Court affirmed-SLP of assessee dismissed. [Art. 136]

JSR Infra Projects (P.) Ltd. v. TRO (2025) 307 Taxman 578 (Mad)(HC)

S. 226 : Collection and recovery-Modes of recovery-Order set aside by the Tribunal-Order of attachment was directed to be lifted. [S. 153A, Art. 226]

CIT v. Vijay Goel (2025) 307 Taxman 445 (SC) Editorial: CIT v. ITAT (2025) 179 taxmann.com 409 (Bom) HC)

S. 158BC: Block assessment-No satisfaction note-Delay of 595 days-SLP dismissed on account of delay and also on merits. [S. 132, Art. 136]

ACIT v. Kishore Kumar Sharma (2025) 307 Taxman 172 (SC) Editorial: Kishore Kumar Sharma v. ACIT [2025] 178 taxmann.com 315 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-No incriminating material-SLP of revenue dismissed. [Art. 136]

ACIT, IT v. LinkedIn Singapore Pte. Ltd. (2025) 307 Taxman 524 (SC) Editorial: Linkedin Singapore PTE. Ltd. v. ACIT(IT) [2025] 179 taxmann.com 412 (Bom)(HC)

S. 151: Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-Approval granted after expiry of three years-SLP delay of 411 days-SLP of revenue was dismissed on account of delay as well as on merits. [S.148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 149(1)(b), Art. 136]

Shubh Buildcon v. ITO (2025) 307 Taxman 181 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 150: Assessment-Order on appeal-Survey-Direction issued by the CIT(A) beyond the limitation period-No assessment or reassessment could be made as the time period prescribed under section 149 had already expired-Assessing Officer could not have reopened assessment in compliance with said direction.[S. 133A, 148, 149, 150(1),250, Art. 226]

Cherian Nallathu Abraham Annamma v. ITO, IT (2025) 307 Taxman 367 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 149: Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Concession given by Additional Solicitor General (ASG)-Notice under section 148 dated 5-4-2022, and all consequential orders/notices were to be quashed.[S. 148, 149(1)(b),151, Art. 226]

Verjinia Foods Ltd. v. ITO (2025) 307 Taxman 563 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 149: Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Concession made by Additional Solicitor General before the Supreme Court as recorded in Rajeev Bansal-Notice being barred by limitation was to be dropped, and consequently reassessment order, demand notice and penalty notices were quashed and set aside. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Opera Exports (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 307 Taxman 65 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 149: Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Surviving period-date of earlier notice under section 148 read with TOLA up to 30-06-2021, last permissible date for issuance of reassessment notice under section 148 would be 18-06-2022-Notice dated 27-07-2022 issued under section 148 having been issued beyond surviving time was invalid [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]