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 – Method of accounting construction contract – Completion method – Allocation of expenses -Accounting standard AS-7 – Revision is held to be not justified .

CAE India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 177 ITD 780 (Bang) (Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Powers – Order passed with in month of conclusion of hearing , though dispatched after 3 months cannot be said to be null and void .

Anil Kisanlal Marda. v. ITO (2019) 177 ITD 749 /182 DTR 153 / 201 TTJ 100(Pune) (Trib.)

S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence -Purchase of two adjacent flats – Could be treated as one residential house – Matter remanded for verification .[S.45 ]

Pramod Sahai Bhatnagar, HUF v. ACIT (2019) 177 ITD 799 /182 DTR 10 / 202 TTJ 127(Jaipur) (Trib.)

S. 2(12) : Beneficial Owner-Provisional attachment-Return of money on cancellation of order–Appellant cannot be held to be beneficial owner – Attachment of bank account was set aside. [S. 2(9), 24]

Iscon Ceramic (P.) Ltd. v. Initiating Officer, (2019) 265 Taxman 364 (PBPTA – AT)

S. 271D : Penalty–Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Otherwise than by account payee cheque or account payee bank draft– Journal entries–Transaction bonafide–Not liable penalty.[S.269SS, 269T].

PCIT v. Shakti Foundation (2019) 107 taxmann.com 459/ 265Taxman 243 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP is granted to the revenue, PCIT v. Shakti Foundation (2019) 265 Taxman 242 (SC)

S. 268A : Appeal–Low tax effect-Entire tax effect being less than a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs, appeal filed by revenue was dismissed. [S.260A]

CIT v. Dinakar Ullal (2019) 265 Taxman 81 (Mag.) (Karn.)(HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal–Powers-Remand to CIT(E) is held to be proper. [S.12A, 80G(5)]

People Cause Foundation v. ITAT (2019) 265 Taxman 356 (All)(HC)

S. 252 : Appellate Tribunal–Members–Qualification–Appointment-Process of selecting only few applicants for purposes of interview, while rejecting others without any intelligible differential being applied in classification was not discriminatory and violative of article 14 of Constitution. [Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal Members (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963, R. 4]

Puneet Sharma. v. UOI (2019) 265 Taxman 311 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 244A : Refund–Interest on refunds–Claim was made first time before Tribunal-Claim was allowed in remand proceedings by CIT (A)-Refund order was not delayed for any period attributable to assessee, Tribunal is justified in allowing interest to assessee. [S. 244A(1)]

CIT v. Melstar Information Technologies Ltd. (2019) 106 taxmann.com 142 / 265 Taxman 50 (Mag.)/ 181 DTR 29 /(2020) 313 CTR 109(Bom.)(HC)

S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax–Book profit-Failure to deposit advance tax in respect of tax payable under section 115JB, matter required an in-depth hearing and, therefore, appeal be listed as per its turn. [S. 115J]

CIT (LTU) v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2019) 265 Taxman 237/ 310 CTR 723 /182 DTR 87 (SC) Editorial: Order in CIT(LTU) v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2017) 398 ITR 439/85 taxmann.com 349 (Bom.)(HC)