This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-The Tribunal has consciously adjudicated a case instead of referring it to a special bench as desired by the assessee, it is not open to him to try achieving the same under the garb of 254(2) proceedings-Miscellaneous application is rejected.

Sale Mohammed Padamsee & CO. v. PCIT, (2021) 213 TTJ 895 / 206 DTR 102 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Power-Additional evidence-Non-consideration of additional evidence placed on record would cause prejudice to assessee-Commissioner (Appeals) to admit additional evidence. [R. 46A, ITAT R, 29]

Sanjay Matai v. ITO (2021) 91 ITR 597 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Power-Additional evidence-Non-consideration of additional evidence placed on record would cause prejudice to assessee-Commissioner (Appeals) to admit additional evidence. [R. 46A, ITATR, 29]

Sanjay Matai v. ITO (2021) 91 ITR 597 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Power of enhancement of income-Commissioner (Appeals) cannot introduce new source of income-Assessment to be confined to items of income which were subject matter of original assessment. [S.. 251(1)(a)]

N. R. Agarwal Industries Ltd. v. ACIT (2021)91 ITR 503 (Surat) (Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Business expenditure-Confirmed by the CIT(A) by adopting different reasoning than that of Assessing Officer-Order set aside to the Assessing Officer for fresh order as per law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing [S. 37(1),40(a), 254(1)]

Energy Infratech Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (2021) 210 TTJ 309 / 199 DTR 145 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Orders passed by CIT(A) after compulsory retirement as well as in case of assessee not covered within his jurisdiction are illegal, bad in law and non-est since it issue goes to the root of the matter-Orders set aside to the files of the respective Jurisdictional CIT(A) to decide afresh in accordance with law. [S. 120]

ACIT v. Globus Construction Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 213 TTJ 101 / 204 DTR 249 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Cryptic order-Audit of accounts-Business-Unexplained trade receivables-Matter remanded. [S.44AB]

DCIT v. N E Television Network Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 91 ITR 59 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 246A : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Appealable orders-Draft assessment order-Appeal is not maintainable. [S. 144C(1), 144C(13)]

Sandvik Mining & Construction Tools AB v. ACIT (2021) 214 TTJ 523 / 63 CCH 440 / 207 DTR 115 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 246A : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Appealable orders-Draft assessment order-Appeal is not maintainable. [S. 144C(1), 144C(13)]

Sandvik Mining & Construction Tools AB v. ACIT (2021) 214 TTJ 523 / 63 CCH 440 / 207 DTR 115 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 244A : Refund-Interest on refunds-TDS credit claimed as appearing in Form 26AS-Short credit granted by AO-Matter remanded to verify Form No. 26AS and grant interest. [Form No 26AS]

Sumitomo Corporation v. DCIT (IT) (2021) 213 TTJ 137 (Delhi) (Trib.)