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. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Permanent establishment-Reinsurance services to its Indian clients and earned reinsurance commission-Indian subsidiary would not be assessee’s fixed place PE in India-Business profits earned by assessee on account of reinsurance business would have no tax implications in India-DTAA-India-Ireland [Art. 5]

RGA International Reinsurance Co. Ltd. v. CIT IT (2023) 198 ITD 240 /221 DTR 41/ 221 TTJ 10(Mum) (Trib.)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Compulsory acquisition of non-agricultural land-Business income-Compensation is not taxable. [S. 28(i), Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S. 11, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 [RFCTLARR Act, S 24, 96]

DCIT v. Ganga Developers. (2023) 198 ITD 435 (Mum)(Trib.)

Consumer Protection Act, 1986
S.2(1(o):Service – Advocates – Professionals – Highly skilled – Success depends on various factors – Cannot be compared with business – Cannot be held for deficiency of service. S. 2(1)(b)(i) ] Advocates Act , 1961 , S. 2(a) ]

Bar of Indian Lawyers Through its President Jasbir Sigh Malik v. D.K. Gandhi PS National Institute Of Communicable Diseases May 14, 2024 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 372

S. 65(12): Taxable services-Banking and other financial services-Issuance of corporate guarantee to a group company without consideration-Not received any consideration-Appeal of Revenue is dismissed.[S. 65B(14), Art. 136]

Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise v. Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd. (2023) 332 CTR 40 /224 CTR 194(SC)

S. 271D : Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-No satisfaction is recorded-Matter is remanded back to the file of Assessing Officer to pass fresh order in accordance with law. [S. 269SS, Art. 226]

Srinivasa Reddy Reddeppagari v. JCIT (2023) 332 CTR 614(Telangana) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-limited scrutiny-Optionally convertible cumulative preference shares at premium-Circulars would not be applicable vis-a-vis power under section 263-Discretion exercised by Commissioner under section 263 could not be restricted vis-a-vis limited scrutiny under CASS-Tribunal’s order needed to be re-examined as Tribunal either had substituted or expanded reasoning of Commissioner, thus, matter was to be remitted to Tribunal for reconsideration afresh. [S. 56(2)(viib), 68, 260A, Rule 11UA]

Sahyadri Agencies Ltd. v.P CIT (2023) 332 CTR 748/ 225 DTR 403 / 149 taxmann.com 202 (Ker)(HC)

S. 249 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Form of appeal and limitation-e-filing of appeal-Appeal filed manually-CIT(A) is directed to hear the appeal on merits-Order of single judge is affirmed-Whether the question as to whether R. 45 of the IT Rules must be treated as mandatory or directory, is left open. [S. 246A, R. 45, Art, 226]

Dy. CIT. v. Arjun Krishna Kondamani (2023) 331 CTR 785/ 223 DTR 150 (Mad)(HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default-Stay-Pendency of appeal before CIT(A)-Twenty per cent of disputed tax demand is not a pre-requisite for putting in abeyance recovery of demand pending first appeal in all cases-Matter remanded to the Commissioner of Income tax for fresh adjudication. [S. 220(6), Art. 226]

Tata Teleservices Ltd. v CIT (IT) (2023) 331 CTR 412/223 DTR 672(Delhi)(HC)

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Cash credits-Furnished all documents and had explained source of credit in its original return,-Deletion of additions by the Tribunal is affirmed. [S.68, 260A]

PCIT v. Gangol Vincom (P.) Ltd. (2023) 332 CTR 854 / 225 CTR 262/ 148 taxmann.com 126 /(2024)468 ITR 279 (Orissa)(HC)

S. 153 : Assessment-Limitation-Uploading of order on web portal-One day delay in uploading of order or generating DIN would not make assessment order unsustainable in law-Writ petition is dismissed. [S. 68, 153 (3), 282, R. 127 Art. 226]

Prakash Lal Khandelwal v. CIT (2023) 331 CTR 763 / 151 taxmann.com 72 (Jharkhand)(HC)