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. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-Approval of commissioner in a mechanical manner without due application of mind and mentioning only “yes”-Reassessment is not sustainable. [S. 147, 148]

Blue Chip Developers P. Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 76 ITR 58 (SN.) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 147 : Reassessment–Reopening on same issue merely for making fishing or roving inquiries is impermissible in law. [S. 148]

Anurag v. ITO (2019) 76 ITR 38 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 147 : Reassessment–Notice-Notice was neither served upon assessee nor sent at proper address–Reassessment is held to be not valid. [S. 148]

Vikrant Tiwari v. ITO (2019)76 ITR 310 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Reopening without jurisdiction-Non recording of satisfaction that income has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of Assessee to disclose material facts and hence quashed reopening proceedings.[S. 148]

Nandam Exim Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 76 ITR 34 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Reasons recorded and additions made–CIT(A) deleted some additions which formed part of reasons–other additions not part of reasons survived-held no other addition could survive in respect of which reasons are not recorded. [S. 148]

Naresh Kumar Garg, Prop. Grag Electricals v. ACIT (2019) 76 ITR 18 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Invalid if the ground on which reopening have been done has disappeared-Incorrect reasons recorded. [S. 14A, 148]

Vibhut Builders and Engineering P. Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 76 ITR 24 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 147: Reassessment-Audit objection-Full and true disclosure of facts by assessee during original assessment-Mere change of opinion-Reopening invalid and bad in law. [S. 10(23C)(iiiab), 148]

Sanatan Dharam Shiksha Samittee v. ITO (2019) 57 CCH 367 / 76 ITR 25 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 145 : Method of accounting-Rejection of books of account-Estimation of gross receipts-Factors to be considered -Estimation pure question of fact -Assessee’s turnover growing more than 5 times compared to last year -Reliance on past year’s figures not appropriate guide -Comparison with other similar businesses-Application of net profit rate of 8% highly excessive-Where books of account not available, AO should rely on Audit Report-AO is directed to apply net profit of 6%. [S. 145(3)]

Shobha Ram Sharma v. ACIT (2019) 75 ITR 394 (Agra)(Trib.)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel–Draft assessment order-Assessee is a LLP in Germany-TPO had not proposed any variation– Assessee was not a foreign company assessee is not eligible to draft AO order-Draft assessment order and final order passed by AO held void ab initio-DTAA-India–Germany. [S. 144C(15) (b), Art. 12]

Maquet Holdings B. V. & Amp; Co. KG v. Dy. CIT(IT) (2019) 177 DTR 279 / 200 TTJ 120 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 143(3) : Assessment–Books of account–TDS return-Difference in income as per 26AS and books of accounts–No additions can be warranted. [S.28(i), Form, 26AS]

Roopa Electricals v. ITO (2019) 57 CCH 501/ 76 ITR 39 (SMC) (SN) (Bang.)(Trib.)