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. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years-Survey –Reassessment on the basis of statement of the partner –Reassessment is held to be valid- Adoption of cost of construction – Matter is remanded [ S.133A ]

Ganpati Plaza v. ITO (2018) 52 CCH 535 /165 DTR 25 /193 TTJ 86 Jaipur) (Trib)

S. 80P : Co-operative societies – Interest income earned by assessee was from carrying on its business activities— Entitle to deduction [ S.80P(2)(a))(i) ]

ITO v. Maharashtra Bank Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd. (2017) 51 CCH 756 / (2018 )167 DTR 1 / 193 TTJ 735 (Pune) ( Trib)

S.68: Cash credits – Amount transferred from Pakistan – Source properly explained – Deletion of addition is held to be justified .

ITO v. Sangeeta Kotoomal Esrani (2017) 51 CCH 782/ ( 2018) 196 TTJ 1002 ( Pune(Trib)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Pre-operative expenses— Interest from banks—Capital Receipt-Income from other sources . [ S. 3,56, 145 ]

ITO v. Kolkata Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. ( 2017) 51 CCH 779 (2018) 196 TTJ 17(UO) (Kol) (Trib)

S.2(22)(e): Deemed dividend – Intercorporate deposit -Business transactions -Deposit in the course of business- Interest income was offered as income – Not assessable as deemed dividend.

CIT v. Basant Poddar ( 2019) 412 ITR 529/ 173 DTR 368 / 307 CTR 341 ( 2020) 116 taxmann.com 799( Karn) (HC)

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax -None of the authorities gave clear finding about evading tax wilfully- Minor lapse on the part of the assessee of not mentioning stock, undisclosed income in the facts of this case do not attract launch of prosecution- Prosecution proceedings were quashed. [S.277, 278B]

N.R. Agrwal Industries Ltd. v. JCIT (2019) 173 DTR 145 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Valuation–Reference to valuation Officer- Discretionary power of the AO- Possible view–Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 45, 55A]

Jitindar Singh Chadha. v. PCIT (2019) 175 ITD 32/ 200 TTJ 98 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record –Concealment penalty-Quantum reduced to nil-Deletion of penalty by Tribunal-Tribunal recalled earlier order on rectification application of the revenue-Recalling of the order is held to be valid. [S. 271(1)(c)]

Sheetal Diamonds Ltd. v. ITAT (2019) 306 CTR 339 / 173 DTR 353 / 102 taxmann.com 177 ( Bom.) (HC)

S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal–Delay of 107 days-No affidavit of Chartered Accountant was filed–Delay was not satisfactorily explained–Appeal was dismissed being barred by limitation. [S. 254(1)]

Krishna Developers. v. DCIT (2019) 175 ITD 86 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 226 : Collection and recovery-Stay–Pendency of appeal before Appellate Tribunal-Transfer pricing adjustments–Respondents were directed not to enforce the demand and also not to adjust the refund amounts due and payable during the pendency of appeal before the Tribunal–Tribunal is directed to complete the hearing as expeditiously as possible and under no circumstances beyond 31st March, 2019. [S. 220, 254(1), Art. 226]

Sony India (P) Ltd. v. ITAT (2019) 306 CTR 305 / 173 DTR 321 (Delhi ) (HC) Sony Mobile Communications India (P) Ltd. v. ITAT (2019) 306 CTR 305 / 173 DTR 321 (Delhi)(HC)