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. 199: Deduction at source-Credit for tax deducted-Trust-Trustee-TDS in the name of Trustee-Assessing Officer was to be directed to give due credit to assessee-trust if credit of TDS was in name of trustee and details were given whether money was credited by trustee into account of trust. [S. 143(1), 154]

Urmilaben H. Dave Disc Family Trust. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 163 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 154: Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Enhance assessment or reduce refund-Order passed without giving an opportunity of hearing-Rectification order was set aside. [S. 143(3), 154(3)]

ILJIN Automotive (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 213 ITD 88 (Chennai) (Trib.)

S. 154: Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Investment in mutual fund-Name of assessee as second holder-Order was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing-Rectification order was set aside. [S. 143(3)]

Brig. (Retd.) Jitendra Kumar Narang. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 81 (Pune) (Trib.)

S. 153B : Assessment-Time limit-Exchange information-Reference was on 14-11-2012-Article 26 ceased to exist after 30-8-2010-Period of limitation could not be extended under Explanation (ix) to section 153B to frame assessment based on such reference-Assessment order was quashed and set aside on ground of limitation-DTAA-India-Swiss [S. 90, 90A, 153B(ix) Art.24, 26]

Subhash Sathe v. ACIT (2025) 213 ITD 187 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 149: Reassessment-Time limit for notice-For assessment year 2015-16, notice under section 148 issued on 29-7-2022 was beyond the limitation period prescribed under section 149 and was barred by limitation.[S. 68, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d)]

Anisha Raoof Dhanani. v. ACIT (2025) 213 ITD 422 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Beyond three years-Income alleged escapement was less than 50 lakhs, i.e., 32.78 lakhs-Reassessment notice and consequential assessment orders were void ab initio, hence quashed. [S. 56 (2) (vii)(b), 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 149(1)(b)]

Krishna Deep Builders. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 147 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Cash credits-Accommodation entries-Share capital-Failure to comply with filing with ROC-Huge share capital in balance sheet-Reassessment proceedings were quashed and set aside.[S. 68, 148]

Colorado Chattels (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 216 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 147: Reassessment-Unexplained investment-Information from Insight portal-Objection was not disposed of-Reassessment order was quashed and set aside. [S.69, 148]

Prasanth Sunil Kumar Bohra. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 34 (Mum) (Trib.)

S 144: Best judgment assessment-Amounts of investments not fully disclosed in books of account-Purchase of flat-Investment from maturity of fixed deposits-Matter was restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination. [S.69B]

Rekha Shah v. NFAC (2025) 213 ITD 371 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 90: Double taxation relief-Foreign tax credit-Filing of Form No. 67 is not mandatory, but it is a directory requirement, and mere delay in filing Form No. 67 as per provisions of Rule 128(9) will not preclude the assessee from claiming benefit of foreign tax credit in respect of tax paid outside India.-DTAA-India-USA.[R. 128, Form No 67, Art. 25]

ITO v. Fashion Factory (International) (P.)Ltd. (2025) 213 ITD 545 (Delhi) (Trib.)