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. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders–Rejection revised return and rectification application-Delay in filing revision application-Directed to condone the delay-CIT is directed to decide on merit. [S. 139(5), 143(1), 154, Art. 264]

Ramupillai Kuppuraj v. ITO (2019) 418 ITR 458/ 311 CTR 873/ 184 DTR 257 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders–husband’s ill health-Transactions in immoveable properties–Unexplained money-Matter remanded for readjudication. [S. 69A, 143(3), Art. 226]

Daxa Bipin Dedhia (Mrs.) v. PCIT (2019) 267 Taxman 62 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Loan-Unclaimed money–Detailed enquiries were made in the assessment proceedings-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 68, 143(3)]

Meerut Roller Flour Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 267 Taxman 18 / 311 CTR 336 / 182 DTR 168/ ( 2020) 420 ITR 216 (All.)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Payments made to charitable institutions and expenditure towards execution of property–Rightly allowed as deduction by the AO-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 45, 48. 143(3)]

Kumar Rajaram v. ITO (IT) (2019) 267 Taxman 65 / (2020)423 ITR 185 (Mad) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue– Addition to fixed assets–Disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act-Enquiries done by the AO in the original assessment proceedings-Revision is held to be bad in law. [S. 14A, R. 8D]

PCIT v. Kesoram Industries Ltd. (2019) 181 DTR 236/109 taxmann.com 390 / 310 CTR 599/(2020)423 ITR 180 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Introduction of capital-Loan from brother–NRI for two years-after detailed the AO has accepted the capital and loan as genuine-Revision is held to be not justified. [S. 69A]

CIT v. Kamal Galani (2018) 95 taxmnn.com 261 (Guj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed; CIT v. Kamal Galani (2019) 267 taxman 114 (SC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court–Monetary limits–Pendency of appeals-No cascading effect nor issue involved in group matters-Appeals of department is dismissed–Question is kept open. [S. 268A]

S. C. Naregal v. CIT (2019) 418 ITR 455/ 267 Taxman 563/ 311 CTR 849/ 184 DTR 247 (SC) Editorial : Decision in CIT v. S.C. Naregal (2010) 329 ITR 615 (Karn.) (HC) is set aside because of low tax effect, leaving the questions of law open.

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal–Rectification of mistake apparent on record-Where the issue before the Tribunal was of allowability of deduction, it was incorrect to remand the matter with a direction to apply transfer price provisions-AO had already passed the order, pursuant to such remand, and deleted the addition accordingly the writ petition had become academic. [S. 36(1)(iii), S. 92C, 254(1), Art. 226]

Piramal Glass (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 102 taxmann.com 176/176 DTR 134 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Registration–Interpretation – Powers of Tribunal are co -extensive to that of Commissioner – Tribunal can direct the Commissioner to grant the registration without reamnding matter to Commissioner. . [S.12A, 12AA]

CIT v. Reham Foundation. (2019) 418 ITR 205 / 311 CTR 756 / (2020) 268 Taxman 372 (FB) (All.)(HC)

S. 234C : Interest-Deferment of advance tax–Demerger of the unit–Not justified in levying the interest for period before acquisition of cement business by assessee-Interest is directed to be waived. [S. 119(2), Art. 226]

Ultratech Cement Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 266 Taxman 390 (Bom.)(HC)