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. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Export of computer software- Development of software at client’s site outside India- Plausible views -Revision is held to be not valid [ S. 10A]

CIT v. Aztec Software Technology Ltd. (2020) 428 ITR 245 (Karn)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal – High Court – High court refusing to frame question as substantial question of law — High Court cannot review its decision — Even if the principle of res judicata does not apply to tax matters, consistency and certainty of law would require the State to take a uniform position and not change its stand in the absence of change in facts or the law [-. Revenue’s appeal before High Court would not lie if tax appeal fall short of monetary limit of Rs. 1 crore S.260A(4) , 268A]

CIT v. V. M. Salgaonkar Brothers (P) Ltd (2020) 428 ITR 386/ 317 CTR 529/ 195 DTR 241/ ( 2021) 277 Taxman 469 (Bom) (HC)

S. 260A : Appeal – High Court -Monetary limit- Case not falling within exception — Appeal not maintainable [ S.253 , 254(2) ]

PCIT v. Solan District Truck Operators Transport Co-Operative Society (2020) 428 ITR 264 / 274 Taxman 397 (HP) (HC)

S. 260A : Appeal – High Court – Case not falling within exception — Appeal not maintainable [ S. 143(1), 154 , 244A 254(2) ]

PCIT v. Ambuja Darla Kashlog Mangoo Transport Co-Operative Society (2020) 428 ITR 94/ 195 DTR 99/ 317 CTR 363/ 269 Taxman 618 (HP) (HC)

S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record – Reassessment – Tribunal has power to rectify the obvious error – Tribunal holding that capital gains were assessable in assessment year 2001-02 – Tribunal erred in entertaining new plea of assess ability of capital gain- Consequential reassessment order was not barred by limitation -Order of Tribunal is set aside and matter remanded to the Assessing Officer [ S. 148 , 149 , 150 (2)]

CIT v. Emgeeyar Pictures P. Ltd. (2020) 428 ITR 341 (Mad)(HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal – Duties- Order passed without considering submission and earlier decision – Duty to refer larger Bench – Matter remanded. [ S.273B ]

M. Palani Adaicalam v .ACIT (2020) 428 ITR 47 / ( 2021) 277 Taxman 176(Mad) (HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal – Duties- Speaking order – Reassessment – After the expiry of four years- Quashing of reassessment – Matter remanded as the Tribunal has not passed a speaking order [ S. 5OB , 147 , 148 , 253 ]

CIT v .Hyundai Motor India Ltd. (2020) 428 ITR 539 (Mad) (HC)

S. 245C : Settlement Commission – Settlement of cases – Jurisdiction of High Court -Territorial Jurisdiction of Madras High Court — Order of Bench of Settlement Commission at Chennai — Petition not maintainable- Place where cause of action arises – Doctrine of Forum Conveniens . [ S. 132, 260A, Art , 226, 227 ]

Mulberry Silks Limited v. ITST (2020) 428 ITR 136 / ( 2021 ) 277 Taxman 361 / 201 DTR 49/ 320 CTR 604 (Mad) (HC) Editorial: Order of single Judge is affirmed Mulberry Silks Ltd v .ITST (2020) 426 ITR 444 / 117 Taxmann.com 62/ ( 2021) 201 DTR 56/ 320 CTR 611 62 (Mad) (HC)

S.245C: Settlement Commission – Settlement of cases –Powers – Settlement Commission cannot consider merits of case at the stage of admission [ S .245D(2C ) ]

Dy. CIT (IT) v. Hitachi Power Europe Gmbh and Ors. (2020) 428 ITR 208/ 194 DTR 33/ 316 CTR 777 (Mad) (HC) Editorial : Single judge order in Hitachi Power Europe Gmbh v. ITSC (2020)423 ITR 472 / 194 DTR 44/ 316 CTR 787(Mad)(HC) , affirmed .

S. 244A : Refund – Interest on refunds – Revenue is liable to pay interest on shortfall. [ S.214 , 243 ]

CIT v. Syndicate Bank (2020) 428 ITR 372 (Karn) (HC)