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 – Non-resident -Deduction of tax deducted at source cannot determine the taxability of income – Salary of the assessee cannot be taxed in India and the same has rightly been claimed as deduction in the return of income- Proceeding is valid only if the Assessment order is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue – [ S.5, 6, 154 ]

Pramod Kumar Sapra v. ITO (2018) 63 ITR 31 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Where the AO had made due enquiries with regard to receipts of assessee from services rendered outside India and where receipts were not taxable in India under article 15 of DTAA between India and USA, exercise of jurisdiction under section 263 was not justified- DTAA- India -USA [ S.9(1)(i), Art .15 ]

Pricewaterhouse Coopers LLP USA v. CIT (IT) (2018) 165 DTR 41 / 192 TTJ 976 (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 263: Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – There could have been no revision by Commissioner without pointing out in impugned order as to what was kind of enquiry that Assessing Officer ought to have made, which he failed to make. [ S.10(2A)]

Pawan Kumar Agarwal v. PCIT ( 2018) 61 ITR 598 (Kol) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -Share application money – Lack of proper inquiry-Revision is held to be valid .[ S.68, 147 ]

ATC Telecom Tower (P) Ltd. v. PCIT (2018) 192 TTJ 16/ 169 DTR 265 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 246A : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Appealable orders – The assessment order cannot be merged with reassessment order as both are two separate orders. [ S.143(3) ,147 ]

Rajdhani Sytems and Estates P. Ltd. v. ACIT 61 ITR 664 (Cuttack) (Trib.)

S. 201 : Deduction at source – Failure to deduct or pay -Employee of society under Societies Registration Act, 1860 – The Employees of society cannot be equated with employees of Central Government and, therefore, applying clause (ii) of sub-rule (1) of rule 3 and treating assessee as assessee-in-default is justified. [ S. 17 ,192. R.3 ]

National Dairy Research Institute v. ACIT (2018) 171 ITD 271 (Bang) (Trib.)

S. 194J : Deduction of tax at source – Fee for professional or technical services – Roaming charges paid to other operators for using their network, payment in is not liable to deduct tax at source .

Tata Teleservices Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 171 ITD 196 / 64 ITR 497 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 194H : Deduction of tax at source -Trade discount – Discount offered is to be regarded as ‘commission’ -Liable to deduct tax at source .

Tata Teleservices Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 171 ITD 196 / 64 ITR 497 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 147: Reassessment – After expiry of four years – No accommodation entries were found in books of assessee- The AO plainly relied on the information from the investment wing, there was nothing in the reassessment recorded for reopening of assessment – Reassessment is held to be not valid . [ S.148 ]

ACIT v. Maruti Clean Coal and Power Ltd. (2018) 63 ITR 78 (SN) (Raipur) (Trib.)

S. 145: Method of accounting – Failure to produce the necessary details as asked by the AO-Rejection of the books of accounts is held to be justified .[S.145(3) ]

ACIT v. Origin Express (I) North Pvt. Ltd (2018) 63 ITR 71 (SN) (Delhi)