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. 154 : Rectification of mistake – Recovery of tax – Prima facie case, financial stringency and balance of convenience- Rejection of application for stay of demand in a cryptic manner is held to be not justified .[ S.220(2), 221 ]

Ganapathy Haridaass v. ITO (2020) 428 ITR 505/ 272 Taxman 548 (Mad)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment – Search- Deletion of addition after considering the evidence is held to be valid [ S.132, 260A ]

PCIT v. Shiv Sahai and Sons (I.) Ltd. (2020) 428 ITR 363 / (2021) 277 Taxman 50 (Mad) (HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment – Notice – Alternative remedy- Notice issued after proper sanction — No return submitted in response to notice — Notice cannot be quashed [ S. 147, 151 , Art. 226].

Naval Kishore Khaitan v. PCIT (2020) 428 ITR 62 (AP)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment – Notice – Appeal filed from order of reassessment – Writ is not maintainable at the stage of issue of notice – Writ dismissed [ S.148 , Art , 226 ]

Suresh Kumar Agarwal v ACIT. (2020) 428 ITR 101 (Chhattisgarh) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years- Change of opinion -Speculative transaction — Business of manufacturing and trading of bullion and jewellery- Review of decision is impermissible – Business loss- Held to be not valid [ S.43(5), 148 ]

PCIT v. Shree Laxmi Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 428 ITR 379 (Mad)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years-Land – Agricultural land – Assessment of Co -owner is accepted u/s 143(3) of the Act – Reassessment is held to be not valid [ S .2 (14) ,54 , 54F , 143(3) ,148 ]

CIT v. Ramesh Shroff (2020) 428 ITR 499 (Mad) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years- Capital gains – Advance received for transfer of capital asset – Reassessment is held to be not valid- Joint development agreement – The amount has not accrued – Addition could not be made even on merit . [ S. 2(47) (v), 45, 56 , 148 ]

CIT v .City Lubricants Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 428 ITR 109/ 195 DTR 457 (Mad) (HC)

S.147: Reassessment- After the expiry of four years- No failure to disclose material facts- Notice to withdrawal of exemption is held to be not valid . [ S.10(15) (iv), S.148 ,154,Art , 226 ]

State Bank of India v. Vineet Agrawal, ACIT (2020) 428 ITR 519 / 317 CTR 388/ 195 DTR 81 (Bom) )(HC)

S.147: Reassessment- After the expiry of four years- No failure to furnish material facts necessary for assessment — Purchase and sale of shares- Audit objection – Reply by the Assessing Officer to drop the proceedings- Notice is held to be not valid [ S. 56 (2) (vii) (a),148 ]

Madurai Power Corporation Private Limited v Dy. CIT (2020) 428 ITR 117 (AP) (HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- No failure to disclose material facts necessary for Assessment — Transfer of shares as gift – Change of opinion — Notice not valid [ S.45, 47, 148 ]

Court held that though the assessment order as such was silent on this aspect of gift of shares , the communications between the assessee and the Assessing Officer would clearly demonstrate that the assessee had disclosed all the primary facts regarding transfer of shares to E without any consideration and as a gift. In any case, it was a scrutiny assessment. It was clearly discernible that the basis for reopening the assessment were two letters of the Departmental authorities. While initially the contention of the assessee that such transfer of shares was a gift without consideration was accepted, subsequently the view was revised to treat the transfer of shares not as a gift and to tax the transaction on the market value of the shares. This was nothing but a change of opinion. Now it was not open to the Assessing Officer to take a second view on the same set of facts treating the earlier view as erroneous. The notice of reassessment after four years was not valid.( AY.2012-13)