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. 271D : Penalty–Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Otherwise than by account payee cheque or account payee bank draft– Journal entries–Transaction bonafide–Not liable penalty.[S.269SS, 269T].

PCIT v. Shakti Foundation (2019) 107 taxmann.com 459/ 265Taxman 243 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP is granted to the revenue, PCIT v. Shakti Foundation (2019) 265 Taxman 242 (SC)

S. 268A : Appeal–Low tax effect-Entire tax effect being less than a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs, appeal filed by revenue was dismissed. [S.260A]

CIT v. Dinakar Ullal (2019) 265 Taxman 81 (Mag.) (Karn.)(HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal–Powers-Remand to CIT(E) is held to be proper. [S.12A, 80G(5)]

People Cause Foundation v. ITAT (2019) 265 Taxman 356 (All)(HC)

S. 252 : Appellate Tribunal–Members–Qualification–Appointment-Process of selecting only few applicants for purposes of interview, while rejecting others without any intelligible differential being applied in classification was not discriminatory and violative of article 14 of Constitution. [Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal Members (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963, R. 4]

Puneet Sharma. v. UOI (2019) 265 Taxman 311 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 244A : Refund–Interest on refunds–Claim was made first time before Tribunal-Claim was allowed in remand proceedings by CIT (A)-Refund order was not delayed for any period attributable to assessee, Tribunal is justified in allowing interest to assessee. [S. 244A(1)]

CIT v. Melstar Information Technologies Ltd. (2019) 106 taxmann.com 142 / 265 Taxman 50 (Mag.)/ 181 DTR 29 /(2020) 313 CTR 109(Bom.)(HC)

S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax–Book profit-Failure to deposit advance tax in respect of tax payable under section 115JB, matter required an in-depth hearing and, therefore, appeal be listed as per its turn. [S. 115J]

CIT (LTU) v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2019) 265 Taxman 237/ 310 CTR 723 /182 DTR 87 (SC) Editorial: Order in CIT(LTU) v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2017) 398 ITR 439/85 taxmann.com 349 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 222 : Collection and recovery-Certificate to Tax Recovery Officer -Attachment order by tax recovery officer-Writ is held to be not maintainable-Directed to make claim before Tax recovery Officer. [Second Schedule, R. 11, Art. 222]

Nilesh Popatlal Patel v. TRO (2019) 417 ITR 627/ 265 Taxman 340/ 311 CTR 78/ 182 DTR 44 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 222 : Collection and recovery-Certificate to Tax Recovery Officer–Warrant of arrest–Issue of warrant of arrest without issuing show cause notice is did not fulfil requirements prescribed under rule 73(1) of Schedule II of Act-Held to be y ultra vires and quashed. [Schedule II, Rule 73(1)]

Lalith kumar Ramani. v. Recovery Officer (2019) 265 Taxman 305 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default–Stay–Rejection of stay application and directing to pay 20 percent of demand, without application of mind is held to be bad in law. (Art. 226]

Zinzuwadia and Sons v. DCIT (2019)419 ITR 169/ 265 Taxman 261/183 DTR 65/311 CTR 297 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 158BD : Block assessment-Undisclosed income of any other person-Non-recording of reasons independently by Assessing Authority of searched person, could not be said to be fatal for initiating proceedings. [S. 132, 158BC]

V. Vijayalakshmi (Smt.) v. DCIT (2019) 265 Taxman 71 (Mag) (Mad.) (HC)