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. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment –Failure to file form No 29B -Return filed on the advice of Chartered Accountant – Levy of penalty is held to be not justified .[ S.115JB ]

Vinay Autoparts P. Ltd. v. ITO (2020) 187 DTR 398 (Mad) (HC)

S. 245I : Settlement Commission – Order – Conclusive -Income decalred was more than 100 times of returned income – Petition was accepted – Writ petition was filed by the recenue for reopeing of the order passed – Dismissing the petition the Court held that as a policy matter, Revenue is not to prolong litigations but bring finality, particularly when amount of Revenue involved is not more than two crores [S.245D(4), Art ,226 ]

CIT v. ITSC (2020) 195 DTR 41 / 317 CTR 579 (Pat.) (HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission -Failure of revenue to communicate ex-parte order of stay – Order passed by the Settlement Commission admitting the petition Directed to pass final order with in – Writ petition of revenue was dismissed. [ S.245AB , 245C ,245D(2C() Art , 226 ]

CIT v. ITSC (2020) 188 DTR 244 / 316 CTR 796 (Mad) (HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission –Limitation Application filed by the assessee is barred by limitation – Writ petition dismissed .[ S.245D(4), 245D(6B), Art, 226 ]

Jay kumar Singh v. PCIT (2020) 187 DTR 283 / 313 CTR 609 (MP )(HC)

S. 226 : Collection and recovery – Stay -Penalty demand – Collected more than 20% of penalty in dispute – Revenue is directed to refund the excess of 20% collected by the revenue [ Art .226 ]

Tata Telle Services Ltd v. PCT (2020) 196 DTR 145 / 317 CTR 841 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 201 : Deduction at source – Failure to deduct or pay – Covid -19 – Notices withdrawn – Proceedings dropped [ S. 201(1)(IA), Art , 226 ]

BT India P. Ltd. v. ITO (2020) 188 DTR 58 / 315 CTR 341 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 158BE : Block assessment – Time limit – Prohibitory order -Last panchanama- Prohibitory order does not extend the limitation – Order of Tribunal is affirmed . [ S.132 , 158BC ]

CIT v. Pushupati Granites P. Ltd. (2020) 188 DTR 109/316 CTR 663 (Bom) (HC)

S. 158BC : Block assessment – Undisclosed income –After examining the details the Tribunal deleted the addition on facts – No question of law [ S.158BB(1), 260A]

PCIT v. Sunil M. Thakkar (2020) 317 CTR 262 (Bom)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment – Notice issued u/s 92CA based on the reassment notice was challenged as the objection to reassment notice was not disposed off – Directed to dispose the objection and proceedings u/s 92CA was stayed [S. 92CA, 148, Art , 226 ]

Essilor India P. Ltd v. ACIT (2020) 187 DTR 430 / 315 CTR 199 (Karn) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment –Failure to deduct tax at source- No failure to disclose material facts – Reassessment is bad ib law .[ S.40(a)(ia), 148 Art , 226 ]

Nielsen (India) P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 187 DTR 451 (Bom) (HC)