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.37(1): Business expenditure-Interest on borrowed funds-Set-off of interest receipts against interest paid-Commencement of business-Interest income for all assessment years to be assessed under head “Business”-Order of Tribunal set aside and order of Commissioner (Appeals) restored. [S.28(1), 56, 57(iii)

Modi Business Centre Pvt. Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2025) 480 ITR 471 (Bom)(HC)

S. 13 : Denial of exemption—Trust or institution—Investment restrictions—Salary paid to chairperson—Considered reasonable considering qualifications and services rendered—No violation of section 13(1)(c)—Trust entitled to exemption. [Ss. 11, 12, 12A, 13(1)(c), 13(2)(c), 40A(2)]

CIT v. IILM Foundation (2025) 480 ITR 1 / 174 taxmann.com 605 (Delhi) (HC).

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Rule of consistency-No change in facts-Exemption under section 10(23C)(iv) / sections 11 and 12 allowed in earlier years-Additional claim before CIT(A) maintainable-No violation of section 13(2)(b) / 13(3) in respect of residential accommodation given to trustees as employees-Tribunal order affirmed. [S. 2(15), 10(23C)(iv), 12, 13(2)(b), 13(3), 246A, 251(1)(a), 260A]

CIT v. Hamdard Laboratories (India) (2025) 480 ITR 498 (Delhi)(HC).

S. 9(1)(vii): Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-E-invoicing services-Licence only to use platform/software and not transfer of technology or IPR-Training for use of software did not “make available” technical know-how-Under India-UK DTAA, treaty definition prevails over Act-Receipts not taxable as FTS. [S.144C(13), 147, 148, 260A, Art. 13(4)(c)]

Tungsten Automation England Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (IT) (2025) 480 ITR 93 / 176 taxmann.com 497 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-“Make available” condition not satisfied-Services relating to customs brokerage support, destination services and training for developing global work culture did not involve transfer of specialised knowledge or skill-No income accrued or arose in India from business connection-Payment not taxable as fees for technical services under Act or Article 12 of India-USA DTAA. [S. 9(1)(i), Art. 12(5)]

CIT (IT) v. Expeditors International of Washington Inc. (2025) 480 ITR 30 / 171 taxmann.com 576 (Delhi)(HC).

S. 9(1)(vii): Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Centralised marketing and reservation services provided to Indian affiliate-“Make available” condition not satisfied-Not taxable as FTS / FIS under India-USA DTAA-Revenue’s appeal dismissed. [S. 144C, 260A; Art. 12(4)(a), (b)]

CIT v. Six Continents Hotels Inc. (2025) 480 ITR 14 / 174 taxmann.com 658 (Delhi)(HC).

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Exemption-Compensation paid for compulsory acquisition of land under the National Highways Act, 1956-Though acquisition under National Highways Act is covered by Fourth Schedule to 2013 Act, by virtue of s. 105(3) read with Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015, provisions relating to determination of compensation under 2013 Act apply-Consequently, exemption under s. 96 also applies-Compensation received from NHAI on compulsory acquisition of land is not chargeable to tax-Rejection of rectification application and refund claim held not justified. [S. 260A; Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, S. 96, 103, 105(1), 105(3), 113(1), Sch. IV Entry 7]

Sanjay Kumar Baid v. ITO (2025) 480 ITR 259 / 178 taxmann.com 446 (Chhattisgarh)(HC)

S. 69 : Unexplained investment – Reassessment – Purchase of property – AIR information – Addition for investment of Rs. 10 lakh deleted as documentary evidence showed payment related to relevant year – Addition of Rs. 40.95 lakh for property purchase deleted as assessee explained source through sale deed, housing loan of Rs. 20 lakh and past savings – Once documentary evidence remained uncontroverted, addition not sustainable – Technical grounds not pressed as relief granted on merits. [ S. 147 . 148 ]

Sangeeta Sunil Kadoo v. ITO (Nag)( Trib)www.itatonine.org .

S. 149 : Reassessment – Time limit for notice – Notice issued beyond three years – Escaped income must be represented in the form of an asset under pre-amended section 149(1)(b) as substituted by Finance Act, 2021 – Alleged bogus purchases are revenue items and not “asset” – Reopening invalid – Assessment quashed – Consequential addition deleted. [S. 144, 143(2), 142(1), 147, 148 , 149(1)(b) ]

Shairul Impex v. ITO (Mum)(Trib ) www.itatonline.org .

Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Scheme, 2024.
S. 2(1)(a) : Appellant -Pendency of appeal-Rejection of declaration – Pendency of writ petition – Assessee covered within definition of “appellant” – AO directed to process declaration in Form No. 1. [S. 89(1)(a), 89(1)(j), 91, ITACT, S. 144C, Art. 226]

Kasturben @ Kanchanben Girdharbhai Gajera v. Designated Authority (2025) 346 CTR 113 / 252 DTR 309 (Guj)(HC)