S. 147 Reassessment – With in four years- Change of opinion –Survey – Penny stock – Alleged bogus business loss – AO had specifically examined the assessee’s loss in shares of Shree Nath Commercial and Finance Ltd- Reopening was subsequently based on the very same survey material, Kolkata Investigation Wing report on penny stocks, and the same disclosed transactions, the reopening was invalid as being founded merely on a change of opinion – Notice u/s 148 and reassessment quashed . [S. 14A, 133A, 143(2), 142(1), 143(3), 148]

S.54F : Capital gains- Investment in a residential house – Tenancy rights – Redevelopment –Income from other sources – Flat received on surrender of tenancy rights – Not taxable u/s 56(2)(x) – Exemption u/s 54F allowable. [S. 2(14), 2(47), 45 , 56(2)(x)]

S. 50 : Capital gains – Depreciable assets – Block of assets -Rate of tax – Rate of tax of would be in terms of section 112 at rate of 20 per cent- Writ petition against order of ITAT Special Bench , SKF India Ltd v. Dy.CIT (2025) 210 ITD 1 / 121 ITR 307 (SB) ( Mum)( Trib) – Alternative remedy – Interpretation of sections 50 and 112 – Writ petition dismissed leaving merits of controversy open. [ S. 2(11), 32 ,50, 112 , 260A , Art. 226 ]

Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024

S. 91 : Filing of declaration and particulars to be furnished -Appeal disposed as withdrawn-Liberty to assessee to approach authority for purpose of availing benefits under the scheme.[S.91(2). 91(3),Art. 136]

S. 269ST : Mode of undertaking transactions- Cash transactions Penalty-Whenever, a suit is filed with a claim that Rs. 2,00,000/- and above is paid by cash towards any transaction, courts must intimate same to jurisdictional Income Tax Department to verify transaction and violation of Section 269ST of Income Tax Act–Sale-Suit for permanent injunction-An agreement to sell does not confer any right on proposed purchaser under agreement An agreement to sell does not create any transferable interest or title in property in favour of proposed purchaser.Where plaintiffs were not in possession of property and defendant had been in settled possession for over a century, suit for permanent injunction restraining defendant from creating any third party interest over property was not maintainable. [Transfer of Property Act, 1882, 7, 54, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order VII, Rule 11]

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-Adjudicating proceedings would not be binding on proceedings for criminal prosecution and both proceedings could be launched simultaneously- Tribunal in adjudicating proceedings disposed appeals merely on ground of limitations and merits raised in complaint with regard to non-filing of return of income, non-payment of advance tax, non-payment of tax demanded, suppression of true and correct income were not considered-Criminal prosecution initiated against petitioner could not be quashed- SLP filed against impugned order of High Court was dismissed [S. 139(1) 148, 153A, 276C, Art. 136]

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Willful attempt to evade tax-Set off of short term capital loss against long term capital gains- Search-Revised return-Delayed payment of tax as revised return was filed after search was conducted on assessee and merely because claims of deductions were not accepted or were not acceptable to revenue, that by itself would not amount to wilful evasion of tax and accordingly, proceedings pending before Special Court against assessee were quashed-SLP filed by revenue was dismissed [S. 139, Art. 136]

S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-Tax deducted at source could not be remitted to Central Government within time due to delay in grant of fee reimbursement by State Government-Reasonable cause-High Court quashed the criminal prosecution- SLP of revenue dismissed. [S.201(1)(a),278AA, 279, Art. 136]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Not specifying the charge-None of the relevant columns have been indicated nor have the irrelevant columns been struck off- Appeal of assessee was allowed-Order of Tribunal affirming the penalty was quashed and set aside. [S.260A, 274]

S. 269ST : Mode of undertaking transactions -Cash payment- Redevelopment of immovable property-Defendant, seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII rule 11(d) of the CPC on the ground of statutory violation, is misconceived, as the same fails to establish any express legal prohibition that would preclude the Court from adjudicating the instant claim for recovery.[S.269ST(b), 271DA, 273B, Indian Contract Act, 1872, S.2(h), 10, 23]