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. 143(3): Assessment – Method of accounting -Undisclosed income – Admission by a letter without-prejudice offer cannot be treated as admission of non-disclosure or as an unconditional offer to pay tax. Also, the disclosure is by the USA Co and not by the assessee- It is not the case of the Dept that the amount has been received in the accounts of the assessee or spent for and on behalf of the assessee so as to be treated as undisclosed income of the assessee. [ S.69, 145 ]

Goodyear India Ltd. v. CIT ( 2019) 311 CTR 260/ 183 DTR 57 / ( 2020) 269 Taxman 6 (SC),www.itatonline.org Editorial: From the judgement in CIT v . Goodyear India Ltd ( 2008 ) 9 DTR 107/ 173 Taxman 377 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 143(2):Assessment – Notice – Mere mentioning of new address in the return of income is not enough-.If change of address is not specifically intimated to the AO, he is justified in sending the notice at the address mentioned in PAN database- If the notice is sent within the period prescribed in s. 143(2), actual service of the notice upon the assessee is immaterial- CIT (A) is directed to decide the appeal on merits . [ S.250, 282 , 292BB ]

PCIT v. Iven Interactive Ltd ( 2019) 418 ITR 662 / 311 CTR 165/ 182 DTR 473 / 267 Taxman 471 (SC), www.itatonline.org Editorial : Order in PCIT v. Iven Interactive Ltd (Bom) (HC) , (ITA No. 94 of 2016 dt 27 -06 -2018) ( 2019) 418 ITR 665 (Bom) (HC) is set aside .

S. 69 :Unexplained investments – Review -Tax effect less than Rs .1 crore-Bogus purchases- Assessemnt – Addition cannot be made without providing a copy of the statements and opportunity of cross examination- Initial burden is discharged by the assessee by producing various documentation including purchase bills, transportation bills, confirmed copy of accounts and the fact of payment through cheques, & VAT Registration of the sellers & their income -tax return. [ S.68, 143(3), 161, 268A ]

CIT v. Odeon Builders Pvt.Ltd ( 2019) 418 ITR 315/ 311 CTR 258/ 183 DTR 25/ 266 Taxman 463.(SC),www.itatonline.org

S. 68: Cash credits -Bogus share capital- Authorities have not done even the bare minimum for verifying the genuineness of the transaction- Casual approach cannot be subscribed on our part- Matter is set aside for indepth verification . [ S.133(6)]

ITO v. Citymaker Builder Pvt. Ltd. (Mum)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

S.68: Cash credits – Appeal -Supreme Court- Pricipal Officer- Bogus share capital-Ex-parte order – Service of notice- Authorised representative – Recall of ex-parte order-A power of attorney holder is an agent and Principal Officer u/s 2(35)-If a Chartered Accountant is granted a Power of attorney holder service upon him of a notice is valid- If a notice is duly served upon the litigant through its authorized representative, and it was provided sufficient opportunity to appear before the Court and contest the matter but the litigant choses to let the matter proceed ex parte, the order cannot be recalled. [S. 2(35) 261, 262 , 282, 288, Art . 136 ]

PCIT v. NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. ( 2019) 418 ITR 449/311 CTR 363/ 183 DTR 60/( 2020) 268 Taxman 1 (SC),www.itatonline.org Editorial: Review petition , application for seeking open court oral hearing is rejected as dismissed . NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd v PCIT CA no .2463 /2019 dt 4-02 2020 / (2020) 186 DTR 249/ 313 CTR 1/ 273 Taxman 14 (SC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes -Sports -Cricket – The commercial exploitation of the popularity of the game and the property/infrastructure held by the assessee is not incidental to the main object but is one of the primary motives of the assessee- Not entitle to exemption- Matter reamended to the file of the AO to ascertain the mutuality in respect of club income . [ S.2(15), 12A ]

Punjab Cricket Association v. ACIT( 2019) 183 DTR 217/ 202 TTJ 137 ( 2020) 180 DTR 347 (Chd)(Trib),www.itatonline.org

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Charitable activities results in a surplus does not mean that assessee exists for profit- If the surplus is ploughed back into the same charitable activities, the assessee cannot be said to be carrying out commercial activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business- Entitle to exemption . [ S.2(15) 12, 12AA ]

DIT(E) v. Gujarat Cricket Association ( 2019) 419 ITR 561/ 184 DTR 97 /(2020) 314 CTR 297/(Guj)(HC),www.itatonline.org DIT ( E ) v. Baroda Cricket Association ( 2019) 419 ITR 561/ 184 DTR 97/(2020) 314 CTR 297 (Guj)(HC),www.itatonline.org DIT (E ) v. Saurashtra Cricket Association ( 2019) 419 ITR 561/ 184 DTR 97/ (2020) 314 CTR 297 (Guj)(HC),www.itatonline.org Editorial: Orders of Tribunal in Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT / Baroda Cricket Association v .JCIT, Saurashtra Cricket Association v.JCIT ( 2019) 202 TTJ 409 / 183 DTR 367( Ahd) (Trib) is affirmed .

S. 10(38) : Long term capital gains from equities – Penny stocks- Burden is on the revenue to show with evidence the chain of events and live link of the assessee’s involvement in the scam including that he paid cash and in return received exempt Long term capital gains -Denial of exemption is held to be not jaustified-Addition cannot be made as unexplained income- Addition cannot be made on estimated commission for alleged accommodation entries . [ S.45 , 68,69C ]

Vijayattan Balkrishan Mittal v. DCIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum) (Trib).www. itatonline .org Mahendra B.Mittal HUF v .Dy CIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum.) (Trib.) www.itatonline.org Mahendra Balakrishan Mittal v .Dy .CIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum.) (Trib.) www.itatonline .org Pooja Mahendra Mittal v .Dy CIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum.) (Trib.) www.itatonline .org

S. 2(7A) : Assessing Officer – Jurisdiction- The Addl CIT is an Assessing Officer, he can act as such only if there is a notification issued by the CBDT u/s 120(4)(b) or if there is an order u/s 127 transferring jurisdiction from the DCIT to the Addl CIT -In the absence of either, the assessment order is without jurisdiction and has to be quashed as null and void- No estoppel against the law- Additional ground of assessee on jurisdictional issue is allowed . [ S. 2(28c ),120(4) 127 , 254(1) ]

Tata Communications Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (Mum)(Trib),www.itatonline.org

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –
– Furnishing of Form 3CEB report electronically is mandatory as per Rule 12(2)- Revision order is held to be valid- For failure to deduct tax at source in respect of freight charges paid – Revision is held to be not valid . [ S.92E, 172 , 194C, 195 , R.12 , form 3CEB ]

Summit India Water Treatment & Services Ltd. v. PCIT (2019) 177 ITD 770/ 182 DTR 185 (Ahd) (Trib.)