S.14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Investments made and liquidated within year resulting in no opening or closing balances-Order of Tribunal deleting the ad hoc disallowance under section 14A at 10 percent of exempt income was affirmed. [S. 260A, R.8D]

S. 10(26AAA): Income of Sikkimese-Individual-Constitutional validity-—Expression “Sikkimese” has been defined only for the purpose of the Explanation to S. 10(26AAA)-Order of High Court dismissing the petition affirmed. [Art. 136, 271F(k)]

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Sales tax exemption from State Government-Subsidy held to be capital receipt, and High Court order on that issue affirmed-Income accrual-Duty drawback-Income does not accrue merely on export; Tribunal was justified in remanding matter for limited verification whether claim was accepted by authorities in relevant year-High Court erred in interfering with remand-Tribunal’s order restored.[S. 5, Art. 136]

Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988
S. 2(8) : Benami property-Authorities concerned could not initiate or continue criminal prosecution or confiscation proceedings for transactions entered into prior to coming into force of 2016 Act viz. 25-10-2016-SLP dismissed-Review petition is also dismissed. [S. 3, 5, Art. 136]

S. 268A : Appeal-Instructions-Circulars-Monetary limits-Unexplained expenditure-Accommodation entries-Tax effect was below ₹2 crores threshold as stipulated in CBDT Circular No. 9/2024 dated 17-09-2024-Appeal dismissed. [S. 69C, 260A]

S. 292BB : Notice of demand to be valid in certain circumstances-Notice under section 142(1) at its email ID-notices were sent to assessee at email address as available at website of MCA-Participated in inquiry relating to assessment-Precluded from raising any objection that notice was not served or was served in an improper manner-The provisions of section 292BB would be applicable-Petition was dismissed. [S. 142(1), 143(3), 282(2), ITATRules,127, Art. 226]

S. 278AA : Offences and prosecutions-Reasonable cause-For failure to deposit TDS-No punishment-Order of the Trial Court acquitted the respondents primarily on the ground that the respondents had satisfactorily demonstrated the existence of a ‘reasonable cause’ for the delay in depositing TDS, within the meaning of section 278AA-High Court affirmed. [S.201(IA), 234E, 276B, 278E, 279 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S. 378(4)]

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Willful attempt to evade tax-Bailable nature-Magistrate had mechanically passed order issuing non-bailable warrant against petitioner in a bailable offence-Order was quashed and set aside. [S. 276(2), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S. 428, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 S. 528]

S. 271E : Penalty-Repayment of loan or deposit-Reasonable cause had been shown by assessee for non-compliance with provisions contained in section 269T and transaction was genuine and bona fide, assessee was not liable to pay penalty under section 271E for non-compliance of section 269T. [S. 269T, 273B]

S. 268A : Appeal-Application-Instructions-Tax effect of losses of earlier years which were not permitted to be carried forward was not to be taken into account to determine overall tax effect for purpose of filing appeal by revenue. [S.260A]