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. 85 : Legislative Powers-Cannot be exercised prior to date of coming into force of Act expressly stipulated in enactment-initiation of proceedings by authorities by issuing orders pursuant to notifications is not sustainable—Authorities restrained from taking or continuing any action pursuant to notifications [S. 1(3), 10(1), 85, 86]
Gautam Khaitan v. UOI (2019) 415 ITR 99/ 178 DTR 100 / 308 CTR 676/ 265 Taxman 54 (Mag.)(Delhi)(HC) Editorial : Order of High Court is reversed ,UOI v Gautam Khaitan ( 2019) 311 CTR 249/ 183 DTR 1 /( 2020) 420 ITR 140 (SC), www.itatonline.org
S. 293 : Bar of suits in civil courts–Review general principles-If the civil suit was not maintainable in view of S. 293 of the Act and this was the purported defence of the respondents and of the Department and consequential effect of the order dated September 8, 1965, no party could be left remediless and the grievance raised before the court of law, had to be examined on its own merits- There was no error committed by the High Court in its judgment rendered in exercise of its review jurisdiction calling for interference-.Decision of the Calcutta High Court affirmed. [ S. 260 ]
Sunil Vasudeva v. Sundar Gupta (2019) 415 ITR 281/ 180 DTR 289 / 309 CTR 467/ 267 Taxman 100 (SC)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment-Explanation 5-Disclosed undisclosed income in the course of the statements under section 132(4), specifying the manner of earning it from real estate business and paid tax with interest for which no time frame is fixed in Explanation 5(2)-Levy of penalty is held to be not justified. [S. 132(4), 158BC]
Duraipandi and S. Thalavaipandian (AOP) v. ACIT (2019) 415 ITR 437/ 178 DTR 233/ 310 CTR 98 (Mad.)(HC)
S. 271AAA : Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007–Immunity from penalty—Explaining manner in which undisclosed income derived-Paying tax and interest–Deletion of penalty is held to be valid.[S. 132(4)]
PCIT v. Ravani Developers. (2019) 415 ITR 91 (Guj.)(HC)
S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Hosing projects- Failure to claim deduction in return-Commissioner cannot grant the deduction in revisional jurisdiction by virtue of S.80A(5) of the Act. [S. 80A(5), 80IB(10)]
EBR Enterprises v. UOI (2019) 415 ITR 139/ 180 DTR 73 / 266 Taxman 15/ 311 CTR 698(Bom.) (HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Lack of application of mind to return and documents filed by assessee and failure to conduct enquiry-Revision is held to be valid.
Nagal Garment Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 415 ITR 134 (MP) (HC) Editorial : SLP is granted to the assessee Nagal Garment Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 414 ITR 11 (St)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Initial assessment year-Claim was accepted without proper enquiry–Reassessment is valid. [S. 80IC, 143(3)]
Arun Trehan v. CIT (2019) 415 ITR 175 (P&H)(HC)
S. 260A : Appeal-High Court–Merger of order–Composite order being questioned before the court was rejected earlier-Appeal is held to be not maintainable. [S. 32(2), 72, 254(2)]
CIT v. S&S Power Switchgear Ltd. (2019) 415 ITR 376 (Mad.)(HC)
S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal–Duties-Tribunal denying Deduction without giving an opportunity to be heard-Matter remanded. [S. 80P(2), 80P(4)]
Bellad Bagewadi Krishi Seva Sahakari Bank Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 415 ITR 454 (Karn.)(HC)