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. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Specified authority-Order passed by subordinate with member’s approval-Requirement of authorised authority [S. 119(2)(b), Art. 226]

Nd’s Art World Pvt. Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, (2025) 474 ITR 491 (Bom) (HC)

S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Condonation of delay-Delay of 1585 days in filing revised return-Personal hearing mandatory-Violation of natural justice-Order was set aside-Matter remanded to CBDT to pass well reasoned after hearing assessee. [S. 119(2)(b),139, Art. 226]

Bharat Education Society v. AO (2025) 474 ITR 485 (Bom) (HC)

S. 115JB : Book profit-Limited power of AO-AO cannot go behind audited accounts approved under Companies Act except for adjustments in Explanation. [S. 260A]

PCIT v. Varun Corporation Ltd [2023] 154 taxmann.com 548 (Bom)(HC)

S.92CA: Transfer pricing-Reference to Transfer Pricing Officer-Arm’s Length Price-Appropriate method-Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM)-Resale Price Method (RPM)-No material difference-Tribunal order deleting adjustment affirmed.[S.92C, 260A]

PCIT v. ESYS Information Technologies Ltd [2024] 168 taxmann.com 431 / (2025) 474 ITR 396 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Risk adjustment-Tribunal remitted matter for risk adjustment margin-Revenue appeal not maintainable as issue not raised earlier. [S. 260A]

PCIT v. Mahle Behr India Ltd [2023] 154 taxmann.com 224 (Bom)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-CUP method-TPO adopting CUP method unjustified where in subsequent years assessee’s benchmarking method was accepted-Order of Tribunal affirmed. [S. 260A]

PCIT v. Thyssen Krupp Electrical Steel India (P.) Ltd. [2023] 154 taxmann.com 441 (Bom)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Tribunal after giving detailed reasons rejected comparables selected by TPO-No question of law arose for consideration. [S. 260A]

PCIT v. Warburg Pincus India (P.) Ltd. [2023] 153 taxmann.com 574 (Bom)(HC) Editorial : On SLP by revenue, Supreme Court PCIT v. Warburg Pincus India (P.) Ltd [2023] 295 Taxman 417 (SC) set aside High Court order and remanded for fresh consideration.

S. 90 : Double taxation relief-Interpretation of agreements-Matter covered by Supreme Court-Writ petition was dismissed.[Art. 226]

Schneider Electric Industries SAS v. Dy. CIT (2025) 474 ITR 197 (Delhi)(HC) Societe De Participations Financieries ET Industries v. Dy.CIT (IT) (2025) 474 ITR 197 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial : SLP of assessee dismissed, Societe DE Participations Financieres v Asst. CIT (2025) 474 ITR 199 (SC)

S. 90 :Double taxation relief-Interpretation of agreements-Matter covered by Supreme Court-Writ petition was dismissed-SLP of assessee dismissed. [Art.136]

Societe DE Participations Financieres v. ACIT (2025) 474 ITR 199 (SC) Editorial : Schneider Electric Industries SAS v. Dy. CIT (2025) 474 ITR 197 (Delhi)(HC) / Societe De Participations Financiers v. Dy. CIT (IT) (2025) 474 ITR 197 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 69C: Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Restricting addition to the extend of seven percentage of alleged bogus purchases-No question of law-Order of Tribunal was affirmed. [S.37(1), 69C, 260A].

PCIT v. Pravin U. Parmar (Jain) (2025) 474 ITR 171 (Bom)(HC)