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. 28(i) : Business income-Adventure in the nature of trade-Surplus on sale of premises-Where assessee-company, dealing in real estate, sold office premises before taking possession, surplus was assessable as business income as cumulative facts established intention was to resell for profit, not for own use. [S. 45, 260A]

Radha Madhav Investments Ltd v. DCIT [2022] 143 taxmann.com 421 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Shares held as stock‑in‑trade excluded from Rule 8D; no disallowance where assessee’s own funds exceed tax‑free investments. [R. 8D]

PCIT v. DSP Merill Lynch Capital Ltd. [2022] 142 taxmann.com 579 (Bom.)(HC)

Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.

S.5: Property held benami liable to confiscation-Benami transactions-Change of law-Order of Tribunal following Supreme Court decision holding amendments brought in 2016 not retrospective-Appeal against order passed by Tribunal Department given liberty to proceed based on outcome of review petition filed before Supreme Court. [S. 2(9), 3,4, Art. 226]

Dy. CIT (Benami Prohibition). v Anjani Constructions Pvt. Ltd.(2025) 478 ITR 670 (Mad)(HC)

Electricity Act, 2003,

S. 3: Writ-Maintainability-State instrumentality-Tariff determination-Renewable energy-Wind power-Accelerated depreciation-The Nigam could not take advantage of its dominant position to bind them to an inapplicable tariff for the entire project life-The plea of estoppel based on execution of power purchase agreements was rejected-Orders of the Electricity Commission and the Appellate Tribunal were upheld.-Order No. 1 of 2010 dated 30-1-2010. [S, 61(h), 62(1)(a), 86(1)(e) Income-tax Act, 1961, S. 32, Art.12, 226]

Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Green Infra Corporate Wind Power Ltd. (2025) 478 ITR 617(SC)

Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998

S. 88:Settelemt of tax payable-Declaration-Person-Settlement of Income-tax dispute under Scheme-Assessment proceedings cannot continue Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme.[S. 87(k),92, Art.226

Jeevan Prakash v CIT (2025) 478 ITR 584 (Telangana)(HC)

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-High Court refusing to quash criminal proceedings-Filed revised Income-tax return-Penalty proceedings dropped and refund ordered-On facts continuing criminal proceedings would be unnecessary prosecution quashed. [Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S 482, Art. 136]

R.P. Darrmalingam v.ACIT (2025) 478 ITR 80/304 Taxman 348 (SC) Editorial : R.P. Darrmalingam v.ACIT (2024) 471 ITR 769 (Mad)(HC)

S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-Delay not caused with mala fide intention but due to absence of concerned staff on maternity leave Subsequent compliance by delayed remittance-Criminal proceedings quashed-SLP of revenue dismissed. [S. 200(1), 278AA-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S. 482, Art. 136]

ITO v. Sengoda Gounder Educational and Charitable Trust (2025) 478 ITR 356/176 taxmann.com 476 (SC) Editorial : Sengoda Gounder Educational and Charitable Trust and others v. ITO (2024) 298 Taxman 776 (2025) 478 ITR 354 (Mad)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Additional bonus liability-Amnesty return-Merely raising claim subsequently found inadmissible in law would not amount to concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars-Penalty unsustainable.[S. 43B]

Carona Ltd v Dy. CIT (2025) 478 ITR 1 /176 taxmann.com 983 (Bom)(HC)

S. 264 :Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Failure to respond questions-Hospitalisation-Genuine reasons-Rejection of application was quashed. [Art. 226]

Saremal Jain v. PCIT (2025) 478 ITR 472 (Karn)(HC)

S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Penalty Concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars thereof-Specific charge-Assessing Officer recording satisfaction under section 271AAB and not under section 271(1)(c) during assessment proceedings-Revisional authority’s direction to initiate proceedings under section 271(1)(c) without such satisfaction unsustainable-Tribunal justified in setting aside revisional order.[S. 260A, 271(1)(c), 271AAB.]

PCIT v. Ram Kishan Verma (2025) 478 ITR 727 /174 taxmann.com 239 / 345 CTR 68 / 250 DTR 289 (Raj)(HC) PCIT v. Harish Jain (2025) 478 ITR 727 /174 taxmann.com 239 // 345 CTR 68 / 250 DTR 289 (Raj)(HC) PCIT v. Manoj Kunar Sharma 2025) 478 ITR 727 /174 taxmann.com 239 // 345 CTR 68 / 250 DTR 289 (Raj)(HC)