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. 2(1) :Disputed tax-Matter remanded by the Tribunal to the Assessing Officer-Bogus purchases-Tax to be computed on the element of Gross Profit in respect of addition made for bogus purchases and not entire purchases added by the AO in original assessment.[S. 2(1)(j)(B), 3, IT Act, S. 68. Art. 226]

Agarwal Industrial Corporations Ltd. v UOI (2024) 461 ITR 74 (Bom)(HC)

Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020

S. 2(1) : Disputed tax-Rectification-As per clarification issued by CBDT if there was a reduction or increase in income and tax liability of assessee as a result of rectification, disputed tax would be calculated after giving effect to rectification order passed-Revised form 3 is held to be not justified. [S. 2(1)(j), ITAct, 154, Art. 226]

Rajpal Lakhmichand Arya v. PCIT (2024) 461 ITR 79 (Bom)(HC)

Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income And Assets) And Imposition Of Tax Act, 2015

S. 50: Punishment for failure to furnish in return of income, any information about an asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India-Appearance of petitioner is dispensed with certain conditions. [Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S. 205]

Prerna Chopra v. UOI. (2023) 155 taxmann.com 430/ (2024) 296 Taxman 269 /460 ITR 664 (Cal)(HC)

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-Tax payable reduced by advance tax paid and tax deducted at source did not exceed Rs. 3,000, initiation of prosecution under section 276CC was not sustainable and liable to be quashed. [S.139]

Manav Menon v. Dy. CIT(2024) 296 Taxman 275(Mad(HC)

S. 276CC: Offence and prosecution-Failure to furnish return of income-Penalty deleted-There was no penalty or assessment because of subsequent orders passed by the competent authority, entire criminal proceedings against assessee were to be quashed. [S. 139 279]

Gunwant Singh Saluja v. State of Jharkhand (2024) 296 Taxman 302 (Jharkhand)(HC)

S. 276CC: Offence and prosecution-Failure to furnish return of income-Assessment order and penalty order is set aside-The criminal proceedings pending against the assessee were liable to be quashed. [S.132, 139, 153A 271F,,276(2), 27C(1),Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, S 190(1)(1), 200]

S. Arputharaj v. DCIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 572 / (2024) 296 Taxman 291 / 461 ITR 450 (Mad)(HC)

S. 271C: Penalty-Failure to deduct tax at source-AO issued penalty 11 years after assessment order passed-Held, imposing penalty barred by limitation. [S.275 (1)(c)]

PCIT (TDS)-1 v. Hindustan CocaCola Beverages (P.) Ltd. [2023] 157 taxmann.com 587 (Delhi)

S. 271(1)(c) Penalty-Concealment-Not specifying the charge-Satisfaction is sine qua non for initiation of proceeding and penalty proceedings-Order of Tribunal affirming the penalty is set aside.[S. 260A, 274]

Kshema Geo Holdings (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 460 ITR 203 (Karn)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c): Penalty-Concealment-Not specifying the specific charge-Reason for levying penalty unclear-Order of Tribunal deleting the penalty is affirmed. [S. 260A, 274]

PCIT (Central-3) v. Shyam Sunder Jindal [2023] 156 taxmann.com 625/(2024) 296 Taxman 115 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c): Penalty-Concealment-Not specifying the charge-Order of Tribunal deleting the penalty is affirmed. [S. 260A]

PCIT v. Modi Rubber Ltd. [2023] 157 taxmann.com 588 /(2024) 296 Taxman 381 (Delhi) (HC)