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 -Prior period income – Disclosure before Settlement Commission —Neither erroneous nor causing prejudice to interests of revenue – Revision is held to be not valid . [ S.43B 115JB ]

Maithan Steel and Power Ltd. v. PCIT (2020)78 ITR 532 / 208 TTJ 334(Kol) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Business expenditure – Provision for warranty – Record includes all documents available with department even for earlier years- Revision is held to be not valid. [ S .92CA(4),144C(3), 263(1b) ]

SL Lumax Ltd. v. PCIT (2020) 78 ITR 1 (SN) ( Chennai ) (Trib )

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -Interest income- Business income or income from other sources – View already taken by Assessing Officer after calling for explanation and considering submission — View could not be held to be illegal or unsustainable in law — Revision is held to be not valid.

Asian Homes P. Ltd. v. PCIT (2020)78 ITR 240 (Mum) (Trib)

S.253: Appellate Tribunal – Maintainability of appeal — Corporate debtor against whom moratorium order passed – Institution of suit against Corporate debtor prohibited — Provisions of the IBC Code over any other enactment in case of conflicting provisions, by virtue of a non-obstante clause contained in section 238 of the IBC Code- Appeal by department against assessee is not maintainable [S.268A , Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code, 2016, S. 14, 238 , ITAT, Rules 26 ]

Shamken Multifab Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020)78 ITR 214/ 190 DTR 77/180 ITD 756 /205 TTJ 696 ( Delhi) (Trib)/Dy. CIT v. Arhum Syntex (P) Ltd (2020)78 ITR 214/ 190 DTR 77/180 ITD 756 /205 TTJ 696 ( Delhi) (Trib) Dy.CIT v. Shamken Cotsyn Ltd (2020)78 ITR 214/ 190 DTR 77/180 ITD 756 /205 TTJ 696 ( Delhi) (Trib) Dy.CIT v. Shamken Spinner Ltd (2020)78 ITR 214/ 190 DTR 77/180 ITD 756 /205 TTJ 696 ( Delhi) (Trib)

S. 251 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Penalty imposed for non appearance – CIT (A) is directed to decide on merits .[ S.144, 147]

Tariqrashid M. Munshi v. ITO (2020)78 ITR 622( Ahd) (Trib)

S. 206C : Collection at source – Trader in scrap – Waste -Not in the business of manufacturing – Not liable to deduct tax collection at source .

Lala Bharat Lal and sons v. ITO(TDS) (2020)78 ITR 451/187 DTR 193/183 ITD 172 / 204 TTJ 393 ( Luck ) (Trib)

S. 201 : Deduction at source – Failure to deduct or pay –Calculation of levy of interest – Interest to be calculated from the date on which tax should have been deducted to the date on which the payee should have filed its return [ S.201(1) 201(IA) ]

Agreenco Fibre Foam (P.) Ltd. v. ITO(TDS) (2020)78 ITR 358(Cochin) (Trib)

S. 153A : Assessment – Search-No incriminating material found during search — Assessment completed on date of search cannot be disturbed — Assessment not valid.[ S.132]

Dy. CIT v. Madhyam Housing Pvt. Ltd. (2020)78 ITR 296 ( Delhi) (Trib)

S.147: Reassessment — Accommodation entry -Information from Director of Income-Tax- No application of mind or independent inquiry or link between any tangible material- Reassessment not valid.[ S.148 ]

Nigam Computers Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2020) 78 ITR 384 ( Delhi) (Trib)

S.147: Reassessment — Accommodation entry -Information from Director of Income-Tax- No application of mind or independent inquiry or link between any tangible material- Reassessment not valid.[ S.148 ]

Bull Riders Financial Services (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2020)78 ITR 688 / 195 DTR 404/207 TTJ 573 (Delhi) (Trib)