Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


ITO (TDS) v. Aditya Institute of Technology and Management (2025) 472 ITR 638/170 taxmann.com 708 (SC) Editorial : Aditya Institute of Technology and Management v. State of Andhra Pradesh [2024] 163 taxmann.com 738 (AP)(HC) (para 4)

S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-Failure to remit tax deducted at source in time to Central Government-Assessee furnishing supporting documents to show that delay was due to late receipt of fee reimbursement from state Government-Explanation for delay plausible and sufficient cause established-tax deducted at source deposited with interest for delay payment-Criminal proceedings quashed-Supreme Court-Special Leave Petition dismissed. [S. 278AA, Art. 136]

K. Krishnamurthy v. DCIT (2025)303 Taxman 499/ 473 ITR 557 (SC) Editorial : K. Krishnamurthy v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 125 of 2017, dated 2-8-2022] (para 43) reversed.

S. 271AAA: Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007-Undisclosed income-Conditions under section 271AAA (2) satisfied-No penalty attracted [S. 132, 143(3), 271AA(1) 271AA(2), Art. 136]

M.R. Apparels (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 472 ITR 799 (SC) Editorial M.R. Apparels (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2024) 168 taxmann.com 197 / (2025) 472 ITR 793 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-The part consideration on account of immovable property sold was not received as cheques dishonoured-The assessee did not offer Capital Gain to tax during the relevant assessment year-Pr. CIT found that the AO did not examine details regarding dishonour of cheques-Assessment Order to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue-Order of Tribunal is affirmed by High Court-SLP is dismissed-S. 263, Expnation 2(a). [S. 45, Art. 136]

PCIT v. Sinhagad Technical Education Society [2025] 302 Taxman 424 / 472 ITR18 (SC). Editorial : PCIT (Central) v. Sinhagad Technical Education Society [IT Appeal No. 1454 of 2017, dated 24-11-2021] (para 12) reversed.

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Substantial question of law-High Court asked to formulate the second question of law as proposed by the Revenue as one of the substantial questions of law where High Court had already admitted the first question of law. [S. 13(1)(c), Art. 136]

PCIT v. Aditya Eastern India Pvt. Ltd. J.K. [2025] 302 Taxman 416 (SC). Editorial : Aditya Eastern (India) Agencies (P.) Ltd. v. Chairperson, Central Board of Direct Taxes [2024] 169 taxmann.com 355 (Orissa)(HC)

S. 237: Refunds-Direction to Revenue to refund excess tax paid by assessee-Such direction was duly complied with after adjusting self-assessed liability-SLP to be disposed of. [Art. 136]

ITO v. Deccan Holdings B.V. (2025) 170 taxmann.com 663 /303 Taxman 336/ 472 ITR 639 (SC)

S. 197 : Deduction at source-Certificate for lower rate-Most Favoured Nation-DTAA-India-Netherlands [S. 9(1) (1), Art. 10]

Radha Soami Satsang Beas v. NFAC [2025] 302 Taxman 420 (SC). Editorial : Radha Soami Satsang Beas v. NFAC [2024] 169 taxmann.com 477 (Punj. & Har.)(HC) (para 7) Set aside

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Revenue itself wanted the Order under S. 148A(d) to be set aside with liberty to issue fresh notice under S. 148A(b)-Order of High Court rejecting Writ Application of the Petitioner thereby affirming the order under S. 148A(d) is set aside with liberty as prayed for. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 136]

Ravi Agrawal v. UOI [2025] 302 Taxman 15 (SC). Editorial : Ravi Agrawal v. UOI [2019] 260 Taxman 352/410 ITR 399 (SC)

S. 80DD: Medical treatment of dependent-Disability-Amendment made to S. 80DD vide Finance Act, 2022 cannot be applied retrospectively to policies taken prior to 2014. [Art. 32]

PCIT v. Joginder Singh Chatha [2025] 302 Taxman 5 (SC). Editorial : CIT v. Joginder Singh Chatha[2023] 156 taxmann.com 509 (P& H)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-SLP dismissed against High Court’s finding that additions were unjustified-Huge amounts deposited in foreign bank account in Geneva-Assessee pleaded that bank account belonged to nephew situated in UK-Assessee was an agriculturist and his name was struck from the bank account much prior to his visit to Geneva-SLP dismissed also on the ground of delay of 233 days, which was not explained properly.[Art. 136]

PCIT v. Ahinsa Vinimay [2025] 302 Taxman 359 (SC). Editorial : PCIT v. Ahinsa Vinimay (P.) Ltd. [2024] 169 taxmann.com 134 (Orissa)(HC)

S. 68: Cash credits-AO made additions towards consideration received by assessee on sale of shares-Assessee had duly disclosed receipt of capital gains and offered for tax-No occasion for making addition-SLP to be dismissed on ground of low tax effect. [S. 153A, Art. 136].