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. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-SEZ unit-Assessing Officer could not deny section 10AA exemption on portion of income relating to these TP adjustments, since income was not enhanced by Assessing Officer and conditions of section 92C(4) proviso were not attracted.[S.10AA, 92C(4), 260A]

PCIT v. Eygbs (India) (P) Ltd. (2025) 180 taxmann.com 681 / 347 CTR 280 / 254 DTR 385 (Karn)(HC)

S. 80IB(10) : Housing projects-Bunglows which were duplexes surrendered by copaund wall-Portico and open terarace-Open terrace and portico was an area which was otherwise totally open and exposed and could not be brought within purview of inner measurement of residential unit-Two areas had to be excluded from computation of built-up area entitling assessee to benefit under section 80IB(10) of the Act. [S. 260A]

Modi Builders & Realtors (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 305 Taxman 277/347 CTR 176 / 255 DTR 37 (Telangana)(HC)

S. 80-IB(10) : Housing project-Built-up area-Flower bed area, being below floor level, open to sky, outside residential unit and not habitable, cannot be included in “built-up area”-Cupboard projections already forming part of wall area, service area being common utility duct area, and window projections at sill level being unsafe/elevational features also not includible-Tribunal justified in directing allowance of deduction under section 80-IB(10)-Order affirmed. [S. 80-IB(14)(a), 260A]

PCIT v. Nahar Enterprises (Bom)(HC) (2025) 176 taxmann.com 570 / 347 CTR 97 / 255 DTR 25 (Bom)(HC)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Income form undisclosed sources—Cash deposits in bank account-Demonetisation period—Bank account statement of last three financial years and return of her income for last six financial years-Allowing the appeal the Court held that the Assessing Officer ought to have been verified in terms of clauses 1.1 and 1.3 of CBDT Circular No. 3, dated 21-2-2017 before making addition,-Matter was remitted back to Assessing Officer to conduct verification and pass an order afresh. [S. 254(1), 260A]

Sunita Sherwani v. ITO (2025) 177 taxmann.com 437/ 347 CTR 408 / 255 DTR 161 (Chattisgarh)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Shares-Sale of property-DVO’s report estimating market value of property that was neither sold nor transferred by assessee-Incidence of tax, if any, would be confined to transacting parties-Addition affirmed by the Tribunal deleted.[S. 260A]

Snerea Properties (P) Ltd. v ACIT (2025) 347 CTR 722 / 254 DTR 165 / 306 Taxman 126 (Delhi)(HC)

S.54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Agricultural land-Capital asset-Even if claim was not made in return-The Assessing Officer cannot reject the claim on technical ground-Matter remanded-Assessee had not adduced any evidence to prove agricultural activity and documents of Sub-Registrar’s office where sale deed was registered did not contain any endorsement as regards nature of property to be agricultural-Denial of exemption affirmed. [S. 2(14), 10 (37), 45, 260A]

George Stanley v. DCIT (IT) (2025) 178 taxmann.com 187 / 347 CTR 299 / 255 DTR 57 (Ker)(HC)

S. 45 : Capital gains-Capital asset—Personal effects-Vintage car— Failed to provide evidence proving personal use of vintage car-Gain taxable as capital gains.[S. 2(14)]

Narendra I. Bhuva v. ACIT (2025) 177 taxmann.com 540 /347 CTR 549 (Bom)(HC)

S. 44AB : Audit of accounts-Business-Profession-Digital marketing—Digital marketing cannot be treated as profession-It should be treated as business—Turnover below 5 crores-Assessee was not therefore liable to file audit report in terms of proviso to s. 44AB(a).[S.28(i), Art. 226]

Vajra Global Consulting Service LLP v. ADIT (2025) 347 CTR 890 / 254 DTR 217 /177 taxmann.com 734 (Mad)(HC)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax-Remission or cessation of trading liability-Dead horses-Capital assets-Insurance claim-Capital receipts cannot be assessed under section 41(1) of the Act.[S.45]

Poonawalla Estate Stud & Agricultural Farm v. CIT (2025) 176 taxmann.com 308/ 347 CTR 504 / 254 DTR 73 (Bom)(HC)

S.14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Investments made and liquidated within year resulting in no opening or closing balances-Order of Tribunal deleting the ad hoc disallowance under section 14A at 10 percent of exempt income was affirmed. [S. 260A, R.8D]

PCIT v. Eygbs (India) (P) Ltd. (2025) 180 taxmann.com 681 / 347 CTR 280 / 254 DTR 385 (Karn)(HC)