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. 148 : Reassessment –Jurisdiction of Assessing Officer – Proceedings initiated under section 148 shall be proceedings at stage of filing of return under section 139 of the Act- Directed the Assessing Officer to take appropriate decision within a period of one month of the receipt of the copy of judgement . [ S. 124(2), 147 Art , 226 ]

Ashick Abraham v. PCIT (2020) 272 Taxman 538 / 191 DTR 282 / 315 CTR 723 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment – Non -Resident Indian – Notice issued by Madurai Income tax Officer when the assessee is staying in Shimoga Karnataka is held to be bad law and without jurisdiction [ S. 120 , 127 , 147 Art , 226 ]

Abdul Azeez Haroon v. Dy. CIT (IT) (2020) 270 Taxman 216 / 194 DTR 306 / 317 CTR 610 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment – Survey – Failure to furnish details of invoices for expenses- Reassessment is held to be valid [ S. 37(1),133A, 148 , Art , 226 ]S. 147 : Reassessment – Survey – Failure to furnish details of invoices for expenses- Reassessment is held to be valid [ S. 37(1),133A, 148 , Art , 226 ]

Mohan Ravi v. ITO (2020) 195 DTR 108 /317 CTR 451 / 268 Taxman 408 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment – Depreciation – Water supply and drainage – Allowed depreciation at 15%- Issue was subject matter of revision and considering the reply the revision proceedings were dropped – Reassessment is held to be not valid [ S. 32 , 148, 263]

S. 147 : Reassessment – Depreciation – Water supply and drainage – Allowed depreciation at 15%- Issue was subject matter of revision and considering the reply the revision proceedings were dropped – Reassessment is held to be not valid [ S. 32 , 148, 263]

CIT v. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. (2020) 273 Taxman 322 / 193 DTR 6 (Mad.)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment- After the expiry of four years- Product development expenditure – Capital or revenue – Reassessment is held to be bad in law [ S.37 (1) ]

PCIT v. Vijayeshwari Textiles Ltd. (2020) 275 Taxman 560 / 196 DTR 126 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 145 : Method of accounting – Change in revenue recognisation method – Held to be justified .

CIT v. NCR Corporation (P.) Ltd. (2020) 274 Taxman 139 / 193 DTR 66 (Karn)(HC)

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment – Specific show cause notice was not issued in respect of proposed addition under section 69A of the Act and not other issues – Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment [ S. 69A , 142 (1), Art , 226 ]

Kandan & KannanMedicalAgency v. ITO (2020) 194 DTR 172 / 269 Taxman 291 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 143(1A ) : Assessment – Intimation -Amendment made to section 143(1A) by Finance Act, 1993 with retrospective effect from 1-4-1989 is constitutionally valid .

Rajasthan State Electricity Board, Jaipur v. UOI (2020) 275 Taxman 501 / 187 DTR 466 / 313 CTR 754 (SC)

S. 115JB : Book profit – Disallowance u/s 14A were deleted – No adjustment could be made while computing book profit [ S.14A , R.8D ]

PCIT v. CIMS Hospital (P.) Ltd. (2020) 193 DTR 275 / (2021) 318 CTR 349 (Guj)(HC)

S.115JB: Book profit – Receipt in subsequent year – Rate of tax is same – Directed the Assessing Officer and pass the consequential order

PPN Power Generating Company (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (A) (2020) 275 Taxman 143 / 194 DTR 329 (Mad.)(HC)