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. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Not specifying the charge-Order of Tribunal deleting the penalty is affirmed-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [Art. 136]

CIT v. State Bank Of Mysore (2024)471 ITR 761 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. State Bank Of Mysore (2024)471 ITR 760 (Karm) (HC)

S. 264: Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Principle of natural justice-Order passed without giving an assessee adequate opportunity to be heard is set aside.[S. 5, Art. 226]

Shameer Razaik v. PCIT (2024) 471 ITR 448 (Karn)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Sale of immovable property-Allowing deduction on amount paid directly by purchaser to release charge of mortgage in property sold under attachment due to personal guarantee given by assessee-Discharge of debt-Order of the Assessing Officer to allow the claim is nether erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. [S. 143(3), 260A]

PCIT v. Rinki Shashikant Gandhi (2024)471 ITR 321 (Guj) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Remittances to non-resident-Import of raw materials-Deduction of tax at source-Tribunal setting aside the order of Commissioner-Commissioner cannot make addition without directing the Assessing Officer to re-examine issue. [S. 40(a)(ia), 195, 254, 260A]

CIT v. Paradeep Phosphates Ltd. (2024) 471 ITR 419 (Orissa) (HC) Editorial :SLP of Revenue is dismissed, CIT v. Paradeep Phosphates Ltd. (2024) 471 ITR 419 (Orissa) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Remittances to non-resident-Import of raw materials-Deduction of tax at source-Tribunal setting aside the order of Commissioner-Commissioner cannot make addition without directing the Assessing Officer to re-examine issue-Order of High Court is affirmed-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 40(a)(ia), 195, 254, Art. 136.]

CIT v Paradeep Phosphates Ltd.(2024) 471 ITR 422 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Paradeep Phosphates Ltd. (2024) 471 ITR 419 (Orissa) (HC)

S.260A : Appeal-High Court-Reassessment-Matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer-Over due interest-Non forming asset-Question of fact.[S. 36(1)(viia) 43D, 147, 148]

Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit v. PCIT(2024)471 ITR 413 (MP) (HC) Editorial: SLP is dismissed, assessee at liberty to avail of remedy of legacy Dispute resolution, Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit v. PCIT(2024) 471 ITR 417 (SC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Reassessment-Matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer-Over due interest-Non forming asset-Question of fact-SLP is dismissed-Assessee at liberty to avail of remedy of legacy dispute resolution. [S. 36(1)(viia), 43D, 147, 148, Art. 136]

Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit v. PCIT (2024)471 ITR 417 (SC) Editorial: Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit v. PCIT (2024)471 ITR 413 (MP) (HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Ex-parte order by CIT(A)-Tribunal set a side the matter to decide on merits-The assessee trying to use technical reasons-Appeal is dismissed. [S. 147, 255 (8), 263, 260A]

L. A. Developers v. CIT (2024) 471 ITR 437 (Orisa) (HC) Editorial : SLP of assessee is dismissed, L. A. Developers v. CIT (2024) 471 ITR 444 (SC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Ex-parte order by CIT(A)-Tribunal set a side the matter to decide on merits-The assessee trying to use technical reasons-Appeal is dismissed-SLP of assessee is dimissed. [S. 147, 255 (8), 263,Art. 136]

L. A. Developers v. CIT (2024)471 ITR 444 (SC) Editorial : L. A. Developers v. CIT (2024) 471 ITR 437 (Orisa) (HC)

S. 245C : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Conditions-Application was filed on 30-3-2021-CBDT’s press release giving taxpayers an opportunity to file application for settlement by 30-9-2021-Eligible application though filed after 31-1-2021-Pending application which is required to be considered as pending application for adjudication on merits.[S.153A, 245B, 245D, 245D, 245F, Art. 226]

Sanjay Sevantilal Shah v. Interim Board for Settlement (IBS) (2024) 471 ITR 311 /160 taxmann.com 255 (Guj) (HC)