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. 10(38) : Long term capital gains from equities – Penny stocks- Burden is on the revenue to show with evidence the chain of events and live link of the assessee’s involvement in the scam including that he paid cash and in return received exempt Long term capital gains -Denial of exemption is held to be not jaustified-Addition cannot be made as unexplained income- Addition cannot be made on estimated commission for alleged accommodation entries . [ S.45 , 68,69C ]

Vijayattan Balkrishan Mittal v. DCIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum) (Trib).www. itatonline .org Mahendra B.Mittal HUF v .Dy CIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum.) (Trib.) www.itatonline.org Mahendra Balakrishan Mittal v .Dy .CIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum.) (Trib.) www.itatonline .org Pooja Mahendra Mittal v .Dy CIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum.) (Trib.) www.itatonline .org

S. 2(7A) : Assessing Officer – Jurisdiction- The Addl CIT is an Assessing Officer, he can act as such only if there is a notification issued by the CBDT u/s 120(4)(b) or if there is an order u/s 127 transferring jurisdiction from the DCIT to the Addl CIT -In the absence of either, the assessment order is without jurisdiction and has to be quashed as null and void- No estoppel against the law- Additional ground of assessee on jurisdictional issue is allowed . [ S. 2(28c ),120(4) 127 , 254(1) ]

Tata Communications Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (Mum)(Trib),www.itatonline.org

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –
– Furnishing of Form 3CEB report electronically is mandatory as per Rule 12(2)- Revision order is held to be valid- For failure to deduct tax at source in respect of freight charges paid – Revision is held to be not valid . [ S.92E, 172 , 194C, 195 , R.12 , form 3CEB ]

Summit India Water Treatment & Services Ltd. v. PCIT (2019) 177 ITD 770/ 182 DTR 185 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Method of accounting construction contract – Completion method – Allocation of expenses -Accounting standard AS-7 – Revision is held to be not justified .

CAE India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 177 ITD 780 (Bang) (Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Powers – Order passed with in month of conclusion of hearing , though dispatched after 3 months cannot be said to be null and void .

Anil Kisanlal Marda. v. ITO (2019) 177 ITD 749 /182 DTR 153 / 201 TTJ 100(Pune) (Trib.)

S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence -Purchase of two adjacent flats – Could be treated as one residential house – Matter remanded for verification .[S.45 ]

Pramod Sahai Bhatnagar, HUF v. ACIT (2019) 177 ITD 799 /182 DTR 10 / 202 TTJ 127(Jaipur) (Trib.)

S. 2(12) : Beneficial Owner-Provisional attachment-Return of money on cancellation of order–Appellant cannot be held to be beneficial owner – Attachment of bank account was set aside. [S. 2(9), 24]

Iscon Ceramic (P.) Ltd. v. Initiating Officer, (2019) 265 Taxman 364 (PBPTA – AT)

S. 271D : Penalty–Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Otherwise than by account payee cheque or account payee bank draft– Journal entries–Transaction bonafide–Not liable penalty.[S.269SS, 269T].

PCIT v. Shakti Foundation (2019) 107 taxmann.com 459/ 265Taxman 243 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP is granted to the revenue, PCIT v. Shakti Foundation (2019) 265 Taxman 242 (SC)

S. 268A : Appeal–Low tax effect-Entire tax effect being less than a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs, appeal filed by revenue was dismissed. [S.260A]

CIT v. Dinakar Ullal (2019) 265 Taxman 81 (Mag.) (Karn.)(HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal–Powers-Remand to CIT(E) is held to be proper. [S.12A, 80G(5)]

People Cause Foundation v. ITAT (2019) 265 Taxman 356 (All)(HC)