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. 147 : Reassessment–Change of opinion-Re assessment on the basis of subsequent assessment year where in deduction u/s. 80IA was not allowed-No tangible material having live link with the formation of belief-Reassessment notice is quashed. [S. 148, Art.226]

Selvel Transsit Advertising P. Ltd. v. CIT ( 2020) (2020) 420 ITR 100/ 196 DTR 139 / 317 CTR 679 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Change of opinion-Sale of goods-Stock in trade–Reassessment notice is held to be bad in law. [S. 148, Art.226]

Sutra Ventures Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI ( 2019) 111 taxmann.com 442 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Time limit– Tribunal remanding matter back to DRP-Time limit is to be computed after TPO passes the order and not from the date of DRP order. [S. 144C(5), 144C(13)]

L & T Thales Techynology Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2019) CTCJ– September-P. 93 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment–Remand by the Tribunal-Additional claim could be made in remand proceedings–Order of tribunal is set aside. [S. 144, 254(1)]

Curewel (India Ltd. v. ITO (2020) CTCJ–January-P. 87/ 185 DTR 145 / 312 CTR 164 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 139 : Return of income-Permanent Account Number (PAN)– Dispute between members of the society-Income tax Act does not allow both groups to file income tax returns having same PAN-AO is directed to pass a reasoned order with in period of eight weeks. [Art. 226]

Anand Marga Pracaraka Sangh v. UOI (2020) CTCJ–January-P. 85 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 132(4A) : Search and seizure–Presumption–Appellate Tribunal-Duties-loose papers found during search-Not absolute–Order of Tribunal is set aside.[S. 158BC, 254(1)]

Ajay Gupta v. CIT (2019) CTCJ-December-P, 151/ ( 2020) 185 DTR 217 / 312 CTR 381 / 270 Taxman 71(All.)(HC)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source– Professional fees–Payment made outside India–Not chargeable to tax in India – Not liable to deduct tax at source-DTAA-India-China. [S. 9(1)(vii), 90(2), 195]

CIT v. KPMG (2019 ) BCAJ-October-P. 55 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source– Commission or brokerage–Manufacture of goods as per specification–No principal-Agent relation ship–Not liable to deduct tax at source-No disallowances can be made. [S. 194H].

PCIT v. Sandu Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2019) BCAJ-October-P. 65 (Bom.) (HC)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Interest-Party residing outside India–Exemption from Ministry of Finance–Not liable to deduct tax at source. [S. 10(15)(f), 195]

CIT v. Seven Seas Distillery P. Ltd ( 2020) CTCJ-January-P. 86 / 185 DTR 105/ 312 CTR 272 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure–Capital or revenue–Different treatment in accounts and computation-Allowable as revenue expenditure. [S. 145]

Reliance Fresh Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) BCAJ-November-P 56 (Bom.) (HC)