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. 270A : Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income-Change of head of income-Rental income-Explanation is not found to be false-Penalty is deleted.[S. 22, 23,24(a), 270A(6)]

D. C. Polyester Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023)107 ITR 77 (SN) (Mum) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Book profit-Stepdown subsidiaries and associate companies-Revision order is set aside. [S. 36(1)(vii),43B 115JB]

Polygel Industries P. Ltd. v. PCIT (2023)107 ITR 62 (SN.)(Mum) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limitation-Reference to Transfer Pricing Officer-Pursuant to order of Transfer Pricing Officer, Assessment Order Passed without Making any transfer pricing adjustments-Time-limit for passing order barred by limitation-Assessee given liberty to make application for recall of order if found later that Assessing Officer had passed assessment order considering direction of Principal Commissioner within time-limit allowed.[S.92CA(3) 143(3), 153]

KKR India Advisors P. Ltd. v. CIT (2023)107 ITR 4 (SN) (Mum) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cash credits-Assessing Officer accepting genuineness of cash deposits-Revision on account of difference in opinion-Revision is invalid.[S. 68]

Vijay Kumar Singla v. PCIT (2023)107 ITR 213 (Amritsar) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Real estate business-Income from house property-Value of unsold flats as stock-in-trade-Two possible views-Not erroneous-Business expenditure-Details filed before Assessing Officer and expenses allowed-Order is not erroneous-Revision invalid-Interest on tax deducted at source-Failure by Assessing Officer to carry out necessary inquiry-Order erroneous and prejudicial to interests of revenue-Revision is justified [S.23(1)(a), 40(a)(ia)]

Sukhwani Promoters And Builders v. PCIT (2023)107 ITR 122 (Pune) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Share transaction-Capital gains-Inadequate enquiry does not amount to lack of enquiry-Revision is quashed-Tribunal recalling earlier ex-parte order-Second appeal becomes as infructuous-Delay is condoned. [S. 45, 143(3),253, 254(1)]

Saravana Stocks Investments P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023)107 ITR 37 (Chennai) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Failure to specify exact purpose of accumulation of income-Purpose of accumulation not beyond objects of assessee-Revision is not justified.[S.11(2), 142(1), 143(3), Form No 10.]

Medical Education And Research Charitable Trust v CIT(E) (2023) 107 ITR 71 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Failing to furnish required information-No further enquiry-Revision is justified. [S. 143(3)]

Jubilant Pharmova Ltd. v. PCIT (2023)107 ITR 707 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Business income-Survey-Statement in the course survey-Assessment order is passed due application of mind-No findings recorded by Principal Commissioner how deeming provisions applicable-Survey at business premises alone cannot be basis for revision.[S.68, 69 69A 69B 69C, 69D 115BBE, 133A, 143(3)]

Jasjot Singh Garcha v. PCIT (2023)107 ITR 508 (Chd) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Firm-Remuneration to partners-Book profits-interest income not excluded while determining allowable deduction of remuneration to partners-Interest income business income-Deduction admissible-Central Board Of Direct Taxes Circular No. 12 Of 2019, Dated 19-6-2019-Revision is quashed. [S. 40(b)(v)]

Feelings v. PCIT (2023)107 ITR 405 (Panaji)(Trib)