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. 28(i) : Business loss-Derivatives arising from future option-set-off of this loss against profit earned from sale of a land along with development rights-Controversy settled under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024-SLP dismissed as infructious. [Art. 136]
PKS Holdings v. PCIT (2025) 305 Taxman 253 (SC) Editorial : PCIT v. PKS Holdings (2022) 145 taxmann.com 195 (Cal)(HC)
S. 28(i) : Business income-Foreign exchange fluctuation gain-Delay of 825 days-Delay was not satisfactorily explained-SLP of revenue dismissed. [Art. 136]
CIT v. Hazira LNG (P.) Ltd. (2025) 305 Taxman 560 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Hazira LNG (P.) Ltd (2025) 175 taxmann.com 536 (Guj)(HC)
S. 23 : Income from house property-Annual value-Arreras of rent-No retrospective fixation of fair rent-Orders increasing fair rent for year 2019 and for year 2022 were passed only on 24-1-2024, when lease had ended between parties, only arrears need to be determined-Common practice and also laid down in Government Order that 15 per cent increase can be made for every three years-In best interest of resolving dispute between parties, a reasonable 15 per cent increase shall be taken and calculated and submissions made to contrary shall be rejected.[S. 22, Art. 226]
DBS Bank India Ltd. v. Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department (2025) 305 Taxman 584 (Mad)(HC)
S. 10AA : Special economic zones-Failure to file audit report in Form 56F along with the return-Rectification application-Assessee had duly fulfilled substantial requirement as well as procedural requirement, though there was a minor technical breach in fulfilment of procedural requirement, delay in filing Form 56F would not be fatal to substantive claim of assessee-Order of tribunal affirmed.[S. 143(1), 154, 260A, Form 56F]
PCIT v. Astrotech Steels (P.) Ltd. (2025) 305 Taxman 429 (Mad)(HC)
S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Repair and maintenance services of aircraft equipment to Indian airline operators-Services did not involve any transfer of technology, know or skill-Receipts are not taxable as FTS-DTAA-India-USA [Art. 12(4)]
CIT (IT) v. Goodrich Corporation (2025) 305 Taxman 518 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Global online learning platform-Online courses and degrees from universities, companies-Receipts are not taxable as fees for included services (FIS)-DTAA-India-USA.[Art. 12]
CIT (IT) v. Coursera Inc (2025) 305 Taxman 269 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Payments made to non-resident telecom operators-Telecommunication service provider, for providing interconnect services and transfer of capacity in foreign countries-Not chargeable to tax as royalty-Not liable to deduct tax at source-SLP of revenue dismissed-OECD Model Convention, Art 12. [S.195]
CIT (IT) v. Communication Global Network Services Ltd.(2025) 305 Taxman 559 (SC) Editorial : CIT (IT) v. Communication Global Network Services Ltd.(2025) 175 taxmann.com 745 (Karn)(HC)
S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Non-refundable one time life membership fee received by club from members-Capital receipt.[S.28(i)]
Chennai Corporate Club (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 305 Taxman 433 (Mad)(HC).
S. 2(14)(iii) : Capital asset-Agricultural land-adventure in nature of trade-Capital gains-Business income. [S. 10(37), 28(i), 45, 260A]
CIT v. Pandit Vettrivel (2025) 305 Taxman 645 (Mad)(HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –
Capital gains – Business income from share transactions – Principle of consistency to be followed – Once similar income was accepted as capital gains in earlier and subsequent years, same cannot be assessed as business income in the year under consideration merely on the basis of earlier adverse view- Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order is affirmed . [ S. 10(38 ) 45 ,68 , 94(7) 111A, 260A ]
PCIT v. Sarah Faisal Hawa (Bom)(HC) www.itatonline.org .