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.154:Rectification of mistake -Intimation-Refund due to senior Citizen -AO ought to have granted the refund due to the assessee as per the order of CIT(A)- Before the Court the , Commissioner of Income tax assured that the refund along with interest will be granted with in six weeks . High Court recorded sincere appreciation for the proactive and sensitive manner in which the Commissioner of Income -tax has intervened to ensure that injustice caused to the assessee is addressed .[S. 143(1),237 ]

Suresh M. Jamkhindikar v ACIT ( 2018) 405 ITR 544 ( Bom) (HC) www.itatonline.org

S. 153A : Assessment – Search or requisition –Search based on incriminating material and during search also certain documents relating to suppressed income not offered in tax return filed ,hence, it could not be said that the assessment are non-est-Reassessment beyond four years was held to be justified [ S.147, 149 ]

Dr .A .V Sreekumar .v. CIT (2018) 404 ITR 642/253 Taxman 428/ 305 CTR 647 (Ker)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- There was an outside alien material which had later on come on record therefore reassessment was held to be valid .[S.148 ]

Senitax Chemicals Ltd .v. ITO ( 2017) 100 CCH 0049 /(2018) 161 DTR 218 (Guj)(HC)

S. 132 : Search and seizure – Once warrant of authorization is issued against any person, then seized amount is required to be retained by Income-tax Authority – Department is entitle to retain cash till final conclusion of proceedings under the Act.

Vipul Chavda .v. State of Gujarat (2018) 253 Taxman 263 (Guj)(HC)

S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes- Refund -Application for condonation of delay in filing return of income and claiming refund of TDS – PCIT rejected the application on merits of claim / extent of exemption and not considering the criteria required to be satisfied by assessee-Impugned order is set-aside to the file of PCIT for fresh disposal.[ S.237 ,264 ]

Yash Society .v. CIT (E) (2018) 163 DTR 337/301 CTR 729 (Bom)(HC)

S. 80IB : Industrial undertakings – Activity of supplying the audio of the background sound to the film already shot by customers is manufacture and entitle to deduction.

Vijay Kumar v CIT (2018) 161 DTR 278 /300 CTR 254 (J&K)(HC)

S. 45:Capital gains –Agricultural land – Mere categorization of land as Nilam (Paddy land) in revenue records is not sufficient to treat land as agricultural land – Land not being used for agricultural purposes assessable as capital gains .[S.2(14)(iii)]

Sreedhar Asok Kumar .v. CIT (2018) 253 Taxman 204 (Ker)(HC).

S. 43(6) : Written down value – For computing WDV depreciation allowed under the State enactment cannot be reduced [S.32 . Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1991 ]

Rehabilitation Plantations Ltd v. CIT (2018) 253 Taxman 522/ 166 DTR 433/ 305 CTR 213 (Ker)(HC).

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax – Remission or cessation of trading liability – Students who could not pass the examination would get 50 percent of fees as refund within two months from the declaration of results of examination – Contract between parties clear and Tribunal is right is holding that the unclaimed amounts were assessable to tax as deposit changed its character into income.

E.K. Thakur (Deceased) Through LR Gautam E Thakur .v. CIT (2018) 163 DTR 380 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Application of income -Wrirte back of depreciation was allowed to be carried forward for application of income of subsequent years [ S.32 ]

Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT (2018) 161 DTR 73/300 CTR 130 (SC)