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-Cash credits-Sale of property-Showing company as seller-26AS showing tax deducted at source-Sub-Registrar’s Letter stating no sale transaction is specified-Incorrect income calculation rectifiable-Revision order is quashed. [S. 154]
Prakash Khatri v. PCIT (2024) 115 ITR 1 (SN)(Ahd)(Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Business loss-Set-off of brought-forward loss of earlier year in current year is unjustified-Revision is valid-Direction of Commissioner to reduce interest from the cost of project is not valid-Revision is not justified. [S. 28(i), 143(3)]
Posco India P. Ltd. v.Dy. CIT (2024) 115 ITR 3 (SN) (Cuttack)(Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Income from other sources-Interest-Failure to conduct adequate inquiries-Interest paid and received-Justification for claiming interest-Without identifying any specific error in the order-Revision order is quashed. [S. 56, 57(iii), 143(3)]
Gautam Nipinbhai Nagarsheth v. PCIT (2024) 115 ITR 66 (SN) (Ahd)(Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Capital loss-Loss on reduction of shares-Assessable as capital loss-Capital loss can be set off against any other capital gains-Transfer-Reduction of capital resulting in extinguishment of right on shares amounts to transfer-Two possible views-Revision is not valid. [S. 2(47), 143(3)]
Tata Sons Ltd. v. CIT (2024)115 ITR 272 / 158 taxmann.com 601 (Mum)(Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Search and seizure-Stamp duty valuation-No new discovery of fact-Order of revision is quashed. [S. 45,48, 50C, 153A]
Arati Ray v.Dy. CIT (2024)115 ITR 1 (Kol)(Trib) Mallika Roy v.Dy. CIT (2024)115 ITR 1 (Kol)(Trib) Samit Roy v.Dy. CIT (2024)115 ITR 1 (Kol)(Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limitation-Reassessment order is quashed by Tribunal-Original order sought to be revised in revision proceedings is barred by limitation-No error in assessment order-Revision order is quashed.[S.133(6), 143(3), 147, 148]
Anchita Properties P. Ltd. v. ITO (2024)115 ITR 401 (Kol)(Trib)
S. 254(2A) : Appellate Tribunal-Stay-Non application of mind by the Assessing Officer-Recovery of outstanding demand is stayed for 180 days from date of the order till disposal of appeal, which ever is earlier. [S. 154, 254(1)]
Avaya India P. Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 115 ITR 23 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib)
S. 249 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Form of appeal and limitation-Delay of 454 days is condoned-Survey-Non payment of admitted tax-Matter remitted to Commissioner (Appeals) to decide on merit for fresh consideration.[S.133A, 249(3) 249(4)(b)]
Hemant V. More v. ACIT (2024) 115 ITR 43 (SN)(Mum)(Trib)
S. 246A : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Appealable orders-Delay of 9 days-Delay is condoned-CIT(A) is directed to condone the delay and decide on merits. [S.200A(1)(c), 234E]
Balaji Graphics Art. P. Ltd v. ACIT(2024) 115 ITR 80 (SN)(Mum)(Trib)
S. 246A : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Appealable orders-Delay of 133 days-Reasonable cause-Delay is condoned-Matter remanded to the CIT(A) to decide on merits. [S. 12A, 68, 253 (5)]
Apollo Education Trust v. Asst. CIT (2024) 115 ITR 76 (SN)(Bang)(Trib)