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. 69A : Unexplained money-Income form undisclosed sources—Cash deposits in bank account-Demonetisation period—Bank account statement of last three financial years and return of her income for last six financial years-Allowing the appeal the Court held that the Assessing Officer ought to have been verified in terms of clauses 1.1 and 1.3 of CBDT Circular No. 3, dated 21-2-2017 before making addition,-Matter was remitted back to Assessing Officer to conduct verification and pass an order afresh. [S. 254(1), 260A]

Sunita Sherwani v. ITO (2025) 177 taxmann.com 437/ 347 CTR 408 / 255 DTR 161 (Chattisgarh)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Shares-Sale of property-DVO’s report estimating market value of property that was neither sold nor transferred by assessee-Incidence of tax, if any, would be confined to transacting parties-Addition affirmed by the Tribunal deleted.[S. 260A]

Snerea Properties (P) Ltd. v ACIT (2025) 347 CTR 722 / 254 DTR 165 / 306 Taxman 126 (Delhi)(HC)

S.54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Agricultural land-Capital asset-Even if claim was not made in return-The Assessing Officer cannot reject the claim on technical ground-Matter remanded-Assessee had not adduced any evidence to prove agricultural activity and documents of Sub-Registrar’s office where sale deed was registered did not contain any endorsement as regards nature of property to be agricultural-Denial of exemption affirmed. [S. 2(14), 10 (37), 45, 260A]

George Stanley v. DCIT (IT) (2025) 178 taxmann.com 187 / 347 CTR 299 / 255 DTR 57 (Ker)(HC)

S. 45 : Capital gains-Capital asset—Personal effects-Vintage car— Failed to provide evidence proving personal use of vintage car-Gain taxable as capital gains.[S. 2(14)]

Narendra I. Bhuva v. ACIT (2025) 177 taxmann.com 540 /347 CTR 549 (Bom)(HC)

S. 44AB : Audit of accounts-Business-Profession-Digital marketing—Digital marketing cannot be treated as profession-It should be treated as business—Turnover below 5 crores-Assessee was not therefore liable to file audit report in terms of proviso to s. 44AB(a).[S.28(i), Art. 226]

Vajra Global Consulting Service LLP v. ADIT (2025) 347 CTR 890 / 254 DTR 217 /177 taxmann.com 734 (Mad)(HC)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax-Remission or cessation of trading liability-Dead horses-Capital assets-Insurance claim-Capital receipts cannot be assessed under section 41(1) of the Act.[S.45]

Poonawalla Estate Stud & Agricultural Farm v. CIT (2025) 176 taxmann.com 308/ 347 CTR 504 / 254 DTR 73 (Bom)(HC)

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]

PCIT v. Eygbs (India) (P) Ltd. (2025) 180 taxmann.com 681 / 347 CTR 280 / 254 DTR 385 (Karn)(HC)

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)]

Doma T. Bhutia v. UOI (2025) 347 CTR 114 / 307 Taxman 4 (SC) Editorial :affirmed, Dr. Doma T. Bhutia v. UOI (2025) 343 CTR 652 / 172 taxxmmann.com 293 (Sikkim)(HC)

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]

CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (2025) 305 Taxman 4 / 347 CTR 109 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.(IT Appeal No. 250 of 2005 dt. 7-12-2017) (Delhi)(HC)

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]

Dy. Director of Income-tax (BPU Unity) v. Kokilaben Chhaganbhai Patel (2025) 305 Taxman 418 (SC) Editorial : Dy. Director of Income-tax (BPU Unity) v. Kokilaben Chhaganbhai Patel (2025)174 taxxmann.com 693 (SC) affirmed, Governrmrnt of NCT of Delhi v.K.L. Rathu Steels Ltd (2024) 7 SCC 315, followed.