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. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Appeals-Condonation of delay of 55 days-Delay in filing appeal on wrong advise of Counsel-Sufficient cause within the ambit of Section 253(5)-Delay is condoned.[S. 12A, 253(5), 260A]

Navodit Samaj Sevi Sanstha v. ITO (2025) 472 ITR 647 /170 taxmann.com 377 /342 CTR 538 / 245 DTR 443 (Chhattisgarh)(HC)

S. 240: Refunds-Appeal-Tax deducted at source-Refund should be granted without application for it.[S. 199, 239, 244A(1)(a), Art. 226]

ESS Singapore Branch v. Dy. CIT (2025) 473 ITR 541 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default-Stay-Pendency of appeal-Dealing with stay applications to ensure a fair balance between tax collection and taxpayer rights without necessitating pre-deposit as a mandate for considering the stay-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer. [S. 132, 220(6) 246A, Art. 226]

Sushen Mohan Gupta v. PCIT (2025) 473 ITR 173 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 206C: Collection at source-Auction by state government of right to collect toll fees on roads-Proceedings against Department of State Government for Failure to collect tax at source on toll money-No liability can be imposed on State Government if the lessees has already paid taxes on the toll fees collected-In the event of default of taxes being paid by lessees the State Government Department liable to pay interest for period between date of default in collection of tax and date of actual payment of tax by toll licensee.[S. 206C(IC), 206(7), 260A, Art. 289]

Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Asst.) v. ITO (TDS) (2025) 472 ITR 471 (HP) (HC)

S. 205 : Deduction at source-Bar against direct demand-Tax deduction at source on salary-Employer failed to deposit the amount of TDS from salary to the Central Government-Discrepancy reflected in Form 26AS-The department should not deny the benefit of TDS by employer simply on mismatch in 26AS arising out of non deposit of TDS amount to the Central Government-Any recovery or adjustment made by the Department in interregnum is to be refunded to the assessee with statutory interest. [S.191, 192, 234A, 234B, 234C, Art. 226]

Malay Kar v. UOI (2024) 162 taxmann.com 767/ 472 ITR 714 (Orissa)(HC)

S. 194C : Deduction at source-Contractors-Project work on Build-Own-Operate-Transfer-Subsidy-Infusion of equity capital as measure of financial support through contractual obligation cannot be treated as payment for work undertaken-Provisions of section is 194C not applicable.[S. 260A]

CIT (TDS) v. National Highway Authority of India (2025) 472 ITR 486 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 179: Private company-Liability of directors-Order passed upon deceased assessee-director raising tax demand of Company-Company was under CIRP under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC)-No efforts by AO in compliance to Section 179(1)-Proceedings commenced upon the assessee-director quashed and set aside.(Art. 226]

Manjula D. Rita v. PCIT (2023) 153 taxmann.com 468/ 472 ITR 116 (Bom)(HC) Bhavya D.Rita v. PCIT (2023) 153 taxmann.com 468/ 472 ITR 116 (Bom)(HC)

S. 158BD : Block assessment-Undisclosed income of any other person-No satisfaction note from the Assessing Officer of the searched person-Initiation is without jurisdiction-Order of Tribunal is affirmed.[S.132, 260A]

PCIT v. Milia Tracon Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 473 ITR 155 (Cal.) (HC)

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Since rectification order was passed three years after framing of original order of assessment,-Pendency of appeal-Rectification order is quashed. [S. 147, 148,292B, Art. 226]

International Hospital Ltd. v. DCIT (2024) 167 taxmann.com 317 /(2025) 472 ITR 400 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 153C: Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Additions based on a survey conducted in premises of assessee and not based on incriminating material found/seized during search and neither recorded in ‘Satisfaction Note’ during assessment under S. 153C cannot be sustained and deserves to be deleted.[S. 133A, 260A]

PCIT Central v. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. [2025] 302 Taxman 540 (Delhi)(HC)