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

Wealth-Tax Act, 1957

S. 7 : Value of assets – Assets seized – Possession of revenue Authorities — Value of assets cannot be included in net wealth- The court directed that the Department shall forthwith release 85,617 grams of gold, jewellery, cash and other valuable articles as per the panchanama and hand it over to the petitioners being the legal heirs of the assessee [ S.7(1) , ITAct , S.132 ]

Nirajkumar N. Rungta v. CWT (2021)435 ITR 179/ 201 DTR 289/ 320 CTR 289 (Bom) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment – Bogus purchases – Information must be reliable and there must be some evidence to believe that purchases are bogus- Reassessment was quashed . [ S.148 ]

Dove Consultants Pvt. Ltd v. DCIT ( Delhi ) ( Trib) . www.itatonline .org

S. 147 : Reassessment –Reasons recorded are different than the reasons supplied – Reassessment was quashed. [ S. 148 ]
.

Jansampark Advertising & Marketing v. ITO ( Delhi ) ( Trib ) www.itatonline .org .

S. 72 : Set off of loss-long term capital loss-Tax planning with in frame work of law is permissible -Long term capital loss is allowed to be set off against long term capital gains. [S. 45]

Michael E Desa v. ITO ( Mum) ( Trib) www.itatonline .org

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Hardship allowance received from the Developer – Capital receipt-Not chargeable to tax. [S. 2(24)(vi)]

Shri Lawrence Rebello v. ITO (Indore ) ( Trib) www.itatonline .org

S. 69C : unexplained expenditure-Bogus hawala purchases-Third party statement-Opportunity of cross examination was not provided-Payments were through banking channels by way of letter of credit-Order of Tribunal deleting the addition was affirmed-No question of law. [S. 260A]

PCIT v. Dhananjay Mishra ( Bom) (HC ) www.itatonline .org

S. 148 : Reassessment – Notice – Constitutional validity – The delegation authorized being only for the purpose of enlarging limitation under a valid law, such delegation could not be exercised to resurrect the provision of law that stood omitted from the statute book by virtue of its substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021, w.e.f. 01.04.2021.- Interpretation of Taxing Statutes — Legislative Substitution- Interpretation of Taxing Statutes — Legislative Substitution- Cassus omisus cannot be supplied, either by the delegated legislation or by Courts – The Enabling Act only extended the limitation up to 31.03.2021 to do certain things only. Thereafter, it delegated the power to cause such further extensions to do those things beyond the date 31.12.2020, upto 30.06.2021 – delegate to do colourably, that which it cannot directly do after the Parliament enforced Sections 2 to 88 of the Finance Act 2021, w.e.f. 01.04.2021. once the principal legislation enacted the law as has been done in the present case, its delegate was denuded of its powers, in the field occupied by the principal legislature- Reassessment notices issued under section 148 of the Act are quashed . [ S. 147, 148A, 149, 151 , 151A , 153,292 Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 , S.3(1) of the Act 38 of 2020, Art , 226 ]

Ashok Kumar Agarwal & Ors v. UOI (2021 ) 439 ITR 1/ 206 DTR 229 / 322 CTR 873/ 131 taxmann.com 22 ( All ) ( HC) .www.itatonline .org . Ashok Kumar Agarwal & Ors v. UOI ( All ) ( HC) .www.itatonline .org .Editorial:Refer, UOI v. Ashsih Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1/ 213 DTR 217/ 326 CTR 473/ 286 Taxman 183 (SC) , notices issued by the Assessing Officers under section 148 shall be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and to be treated as show¬ cause notices in terms of Section 148A(b) of the Act -The Assessing Officers shall, within 30 days from 04-05-2022, provide the information and material relied upon so that the assessees can reply to the notices within two weeks thereafter- Decision to apply to all such notices quashed by High Courts throughout Country SLP filed by the revenue , Notice issued returnable on 15-3 -2022 UOI v. Ashish Agarwal ( SLP ( C ) 1767/2022 dt. 11-2 -2022

S. 147 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – No failure to disclose material facts –Interest income – Deduction – Change of opinion –No power of review – Reassessment is held to be bad in law [ S. 37 (1), 56, 57, 148 , Art , 226 ]

Ananta Land Mark Pvt. Ltd v. Dy.CIT 2021 ) 439 ITR 168/ 323 CTR 138 / 283 Taxman 462/ 131 taxmann.com 52 / 207 DTR 33 ( Bom) ( HC) www.itatonline .org Ananta Land Mark Pvt. Ltd v. Dy.CIT ( Bom) ( HC) www.itatonline .org

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

S. 2(s): Workmen- Test of employment for hire or reward for doing the specified work is satisfied the employee would fall with in the definition of workmen

Devinder Singh v. Municipal Council ( 2011) 6 SCC 584 Editorial : In CIT (LTU) . v. Texas Instruments India Pvt. Ltd. (2021)435 ITR 1 / 321 CTR 34 (Karn) (HC) the court held that engineers employed in a software company are worken for the purpose of section 80JJAA of the Income -tax Act , 1961 .

S.68: Cash credits – Share application money – Shell company – The DCF method adopted is incorrect and fallacious- the two investing companies held to fit the description of a shell company- The burden is on the assessee to prove the identity, capacity and genuineness and nature and source of credits in his books of accounts, to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer even if confirmations are filed and the persons are assessed to tax- Theory of human probability applied – Addition as cash credits is held to be justified on the facts of the case – Reassessment is held to be justified . [ S. 133(6), 143(3) , 147, 148, Rule 27 ITAT Rules ,1963 ] S.68: Cash credits – Share application money – Shell company – The DCF method adopted is incorrect and fallacious- the two investing companies held to fit the description of a shell company- The burden is on the assessee to prove the identity, capacity and genuineness and nature and source of credits in his books of accounts, to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer even if confirmations are filed and the persons are assessed to tax- Theory of human probability applied – Addition as cash credits is held to be justified on the facts of the case – Reassessment is held to be justified . [ S. 133(6), 143(3) , 147, 148, Rule 27 ITAT Rules ,1963 ]

DCIT v. Leena Power Tech Engineers Pvt Ltd ( 2021) 213 TTJ 1058/ 207 DTR 33 (Mum) ( Trib) .www.itatonline.org