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. 271C : Penalty-Failure to deduct at source–Pendency of appeal before Appellate Tribunal-Revenue authorities should be restrained from passing any order imposing penalty. [S. 201, 206AA]

Uber India Systems (P.) Ltd. v. JCIT (2019) 262 Taxman 133/ (2020) 188 DTR 141 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Excess stock–Wrong entries in books of account- Deletion of penalty is held to be justified. [S. 145]

PCIT v. Deccan Mining Syndicate (P.) Ltd. (2019) 104 taxmann.com 110 / 262 Taxman 259/ 104 taxmann.com 306 / 262 Taxman 306/ 308 CTR 858 (Karn.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Deccan Mining Syndicate (P.) Ltd ( 2019) 262 Taxman 358 / 262 Taxman 305 (SC)

S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders–Subsidy- Settlement proceedings-Assessee had not raised any dispute regarding subsidy received by it during entire Settlement proceedings till settlement order was passed by Commission, it could not urge Commissioner to examine said issue in exercise of revisional powers. [S. 4, 245D(4), 245F]

Mandhana Industries Ltd. v. PCIT (2019) 262 Taxman 137/ 178 DTR 57/ 309 CTR 1 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Where High Court does not dismiss appeal in limine but has dismissed it after hearing both parties, in such a situation, High Court should frame questions and answer them by assigning reasons accordingly one way or other–Matter remanded – Duty to record reasons. [S. 260A(4), 260A(5)]

CIT v. Rashtradoot (HUF) (2019) 412 ITR 17 / 262 Taxman 360 (SC) Editorial: Arising from the order of High Court in CIT v. Rashtradoot (HUF) (2019) 104 taxmann.com 3 ( Raj) (HC)

S. 254(2A) : Appellate Tribunal–Stay-Appeal could not be decided by Tribunal due to pressure of pendency of cases and delay in disposal of appeal was not attributable to assessee in any manner-Interim protection of stay could continue beyond 365 days. [S. 254(1)]

PCIT v. Comverse Network Systems India (P.) Ltd. (2019) 103 taxmann.com 313 / 262 Taxman 100 (P&H)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Comverse Network Systems India (P.) Ltd. (2019) 262 Taxman 99 (SC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal–Duties–Non speaking orders- The CIT(A) allowed the claim of expenditure and depreciation after verification of merits- Tribunal was not right in in law reversing the said conclusion without examination-Masterminded–Liberty is granted to the assessee to bring the issue of reassessment after disposal of appeal by the Appellate Tribunal. [S. 260A]

Shirpur Gold Refinery Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2019) 262 Taxman 390 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 244A : Refunds–Interest on refunds-Refund of excess tax collected was withheld and refunded by department after a huge delay merely on ground of pendency of appeal filed by revenue– Entitle to interest however not entitle to interest on interest.[S. 243, 244]

Nirma Specific Family Trust. v. ACIT (2018) 100 taxmann.com 262 (Guj.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of assessee is for interest on interest is dismissed, Nirma Specific Family Trust. v. ACIT (2019) 262 Taxman 304 (SC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default–Stay-Non speaking order-Directing to pay 20 percent of demand during pendency of appeal is set aside.

Shriram Finance. v. PCIT (2019) 262 Taxman 220 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 215 : Interest payable by assessee–Non–deposit of advance tax of advance tax in respect of consideration received by non resident-Not liable to pay interest.

CIT v. Shanghai Electric Group Co. Ltd. (2019) 103 taxmann.com 376/ 262 Taxman 206 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is received ,CIT v. Shanghai Electric Group Co. Ltd. (2019) 262 Taxman 205 (SC)

S. 194J : Deduction at source – Fees for professional or technical services –Doctors-Payment to full time consultant doctors would fall within purview of S.194J as fees for professional services, and not under S. 192 as salary. [S. 192]

CIT v. Asian Heart Institute and Research Centre (P.) Ltd. (2019) 262 Taxman 395 /(2020) 423 ITR 75 (Bom.)(HC)