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. 36(1)(iii) :Interest on borrowed capital-Installation of cell site towers Provision did not contemplate distinction between capital borrowed for revenue or capital purpose-Expansion of business-Matter remanded to Assessing Officer to examine aspects pertaining to common pool of funds as framed by Tribunal and cell sites actually brought into use. [S. 37(1), 260A]

Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd. v. Dy. CTT (2025) 476 ITR 80 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 32 : Depreciation-Installation of cell site towers-Lease agreement-Accounting Standard 29-Entitle to depreciation.[S. 260A]

Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd. v. Dy. CTT (2025) 476 ITR 80 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-
Deduction of tax at source-Transactions entered into pertaining to assessment years prior to introduction of Explanation in section 9(1)(vi)-Explanation 4 introduced in section 9(1)(iv) by Finance Act, 20121 cannot have retrospective effect and payment not royalty liable to deduction of tax-Appeal of revenue was dismissed. [S. 9(1)(vi), Expln. 4, 37, 40(a)(ia), 195(2).

CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd 2024] 165 taxmann.com 653 / (2025) 476 ITR 769 (Bom)(HC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Non-resident-Copy right-Subscription fees-SLP of revenue dismissed-DTAA-India-Singapore. [Art. 12(4)(b). Art. 136]]

CIT (IT) v. Sales Force.Com Singapore Pte. Ltd (2025) 476 ITR 8 (SC) Editorial : CIT (IT) v. Salesforce.com Singapore Pte. Ltd., (2024) 465 ITR 257 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Capital or revenue-Excise duty exemption Purpose test formulated by Supreme Court Excise duty exemption granted for purpose of industrialisation and generation of employment in States-Excise duty exemption capital receipt-Book profit-Excise duty exemption availed being in nature of capital receipt and not chargeable to tax under normal provisions cannot be added in book profit. [S.115JB]

PCIT v. Greenply Industries Ltd (2025) 476 ITR 347 /304 Taxman 192 (Gauhati)(HC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Income or capital-Sales tax incentive received from State Government under West Bengal Industrial Promotion Scheme-Capital receipt-Appellate Tribunal-Power-The Tribunal has the power to entertain a claim of deduction not claimed before the Assessing Officer by filing revised return. [S. 139,254(1)]

PCIT v. Ritum Jain. (2025) 476 ITR 69 (Cal)(HC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Forfeiture of earnest money arising out of agreement to sale a property is not liable to tax–Income from other sources-Capital receipt-Advance received under agreement to sell-Forfeited-Receipt would go to reduce cost of acquisition of asset-Cannot be assessed as income from other sources-Appeal of revenue dismissed. [S. 51, 56(2)(vi), Art. 136]

CIT v. Meera Goyal (2025) 476 ITR 152 (SC) Editorial : Order of High Court affirmed, CIT v. Meera Goyal (2013] 214 Taxman 298 / (2014) 360 ITR 346/267 CTR 265 (Delhi)(HC)

Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) Act , 2015 .

S. 10(3) :Assessment – Charge of tax Undisclosed foreign asset – Asset ceased before 1.7.2015 – Not taxable – Penalty – Non-disclosure of asset – Ceased before AY 2012–13 -Penalty not leviable. – Doctrine of election/approbate and reprobate- Once proceedings under the IT Act are consciously chosen, the Revenue cannot subsequently invoke BMA. [ S. 2(11), 3(1) , 41, 43 ,BMA Valuation Rule, 3, Income tax Act , 1961 , S. 90, 131(IA), 132, 132(4) , 132(4A) , 292C ]

Deepak Jain v. ACIT ( Delhi)(Trib) www . itatonline ,org

S. 45 : Capital Gains – Sale of Film Rights – Transfer of bundle of rights in 31 cinematographic films held to be transfer of capital assets – Consideration received taxable as capital gains and not as business income. [ S.2(11)(B), 2(14) 28(i), 28(va) 55(2)(a) ]

ACIT v. Eagle Films (Mum) ( Trib) www.itatonline .org .

Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020

S. 3: Dispute resolution-Fundamental aim to settle matters and issues that existed on the relevant date; not to create liability on issues on which parties were already ad idem-Failure to make requisite disclosures does not defeat reliefs granted in assessment-Designated authority may rectify apparent mistakes in Form 3-Beneficial statutes to be interpreted liberally. [S. 4, 5, Form No. 3; Art. 226]

Fresh Pet Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT, [2024] 167 taxmann.com 223 / (2025) 475 ITR 269 (Delhi HC).