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. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Ex Parte order-Notices issued to E-Mail address mentioned in appeal memo —Dismissal is held to be not valid-Appeals restored to Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits.[S.80IC, 250(2)]

AMI Deepak Shah v. NFAC (2023)108 ITR 42 (SN)(Mum) (Trib)

S. 244A : Refunds-Interest on refunds-Not granting interest despite directions of Dispute Resolution Panel-Assessing Officer is directed to follow the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel and grant interest in accordance with law.

Nike India P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023)108 ITR 666 (Bang) (Trib)

S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax-applies on returned income and not on assessed income. [S. 234C]

Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd. v.Add. CIT (2023)108 ITR 329 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax-Income liable to tax deduction at source-Not liable to advance tax.

Krones Aktiengesellschaft v. Dy. CIT (IT) (2023)108 ITR 705 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 194C : Deduction at source-Contractors-Payment of external development charges to Greater Mohali Area Development Authority-Charges not paid out of any contractual obligations or liability-Provisions of S.194C is not attracted-Not in default.[S.201(1), 201(IA)]

Punjab IAS and PCS Officers House Building Society Ltd. v.ITO (2023)108 ITR 290 (Chd) (Trib)

S. 172 : Shipping business-Non-residents-Vessel journeying between Indian ports —Journey was a part of International voyage —Not taxable in India-DTAA-India-Singapore.[S.172(4), art. 8, 24]

Magnum Shipping Services v. ITO (IT) (2023)108 ITR 433/ 225 TTJ 200 (Rajkot) (Trib)

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Quasi-judicial power —Order cryptic and bereft of any reasoning is unsustainable-Matter remanded to Assessing Officer for consideration afresh.[S.234B, 234C]

Satinder Paul Gupta v.Dy. CIT (2023)108 ITR 64(SN)(Delhi) (Trib)

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Order passed in gross violation of principles of natural Justice is not sustainable in law-Dividend-Special rate of tax-Application filed by assessee for rectification to this effect to be allowed and adjustment taxing dividend at rate of 10 Per Cent is reversed.[S.10(35),115BBDA, 143(1)]

Rajalben Hirenbhai Patel v Dy. CIT (2023)108 ITR 67 (SN)/ (2024) 204 ITD 674 (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Search and seizure-Assessment-Cash found on search-Assessing Officer accepting the explanation-Not mistake apparent from the record.[S.69A, 132, 132(4), 153C]

ITO v. Pravinbhai Jayantibhai Kapasi (2023)108 ITR 457 (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 153D : Assessment-Search-In valid approval-Assessment is quashed.[S. 132, 153C]

Dy. CIT v. M. G. Metalloy P. Ltd. (2023)108 ITR 314 (Delhi) (Trib)