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. 147: Reassessment-Change of opinion-No fresh tangible material-Reopening invalid [S.2(47)(vi), 37(1)]

Balajee Infratech & Constructions (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 238 TTJ 568 / 179 taxmann.com 420 (Mum)(Trib).

S. 147: Reassessment-Information derived from a search on another person-Reassessment under S. 147 is valid in the absence of seized material.[S.132, 153C]

Yakin Jayantilal Shah v. ITO (2025) 238 TTJ 554 (Ahd)(Trib).

S. 147: Reassessment-Limitation:Notice issued beyond the statutory period is invalid where the assessee had made full and true disclosure of all material facts; reopening beyond three years is also barred where the alleged escaped income is below ₹50 lakh. [148, 149(1)(a)]

Samarat Finvestors (P) (Ltd v.ITO (Kol)(Trib)(2025) 238 TTJ 423 (Kol)(Trib)

S. 147: Reassessment-Search cases-Mechanical approval-After a search, assessment for the preceding years must necessarily be framed under section 148 and not under section 143(3); mechanical approval without application of mind vitiates the assessment. [S. 132, 143(3), 148, 148A. 151]

Jamna Dass Nikkamal Jain Saraf (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 238 TTJ 473 (Chd.)(Trib.).

S. 145: Method of accounting-Books of account not rejected-Enhancement of net profit-Addition was deleted.[S. 145(3)]

Ashok Panwar (HUF) v. ACIT (2025) 238 TTJ 681 (Jodhpur)(Trib.)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Limited scrutiny-AO cannot travel beyond the scope of limited scrutiny without converting it into complete scrutiny-Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Exemption under section 54F could not be denied merely because construction was completed after three years.[S. 45, 54F]

Sneh Gupta v. ACIT (2025) 238 TTJ 654 / 178 taxmann.com 578 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Unaccounted Production-Electricity consumption alone cannot justify an addition.[S. 69]

Rosha Alloys (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 238 TTJ 357 / 127 ITR 76 / 175 taxmann.com 622 (Chd.)(Trib.)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Valid DIN-Assessment order without assessee’s name or PAN-Omission cannot invalidate the assessment-Protected by section 292B [S.11, 156, 292B]

Rohilkhand Educational Charitable Trust v. DCIT (2025) 238 TTJ 173 / 178 taxmann.com 672 (Lucknow)(Trib.)

S. 143(2): Assessment-Notice-Jurisdiction-Notice under section 143(2) issued by a non-jurisdictional Assessing Officer is void. [S. 127, 143(3)]

ACIT v. Ramasubbu Minnalkodi (2025) 238 TTJ 337 (Chennai)(Trib.).

S. 143(1: Assessment-Intimation-Prima facie adjustment-GST refund-Matter remanded for verification. [S. 143(1)(a)]

BNY Mellon International Operations (India) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2025) 238 TTJ 819 / 181 taxmann.com 222 (Pune)(Trib.)