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. 147 : Reassessment-Business income-Value of any benefit or perquisite, arising from exercise of business or profession-Merger-Demerger-Transfer of Passive Infrastructure Assets (PIA) to ICTIL and subsequent amalgamation into Indus Towers, and demerger of telecom undertaking of ABTL-Scheme approved by High Court-No colourable device-Provision of section 28 (iv) cannot be applied-Non-compete fee-Change of opinion-amount debited in P&L Account as Employees Stock Scheme had been disallowed as being a contingent liability-Change of opinion-Reassessment is not valid.[ S.28(iv), 37(1), 1115JB,148]

Vodafone Idea Ltd. v Asst. CIT (2023) 149 taxmann.com169 / 226 TTJ 224 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 145 : Method of accounting-Unaccounted stock-Cash found during survey-Books of account was not complete-Justified in rejecting the books of account-Bogus purchases-Restricted the disallowance to 6% of bogus purchases as against 12.5% estimated by the CIT(A). [S. 133A, 145 (3)]

Bhimsen Darbarilal Arora Through L/H Rajat Bhimsen Arora v.ACIT (2023) 224 TTJ 487 /150 taxmann.com 68 (Surat)(Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Limitation-Order is barred by limitation.[ S.92CA (3A), 143(3) 153 (1), 153(4)]

Siemens Ltd. v. Dy. CIT(2023) 225 TTJ 703 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Limitation-Order is barred by limitation.[ S.92CA (3A), 143(3) 153]

Johnson & Johanson (P) Ltd v. Dy.CIT(2023) 225 TTJ 241 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Return-Refund-Amalgamation-Non-existent entity-Credit for taxes paid-Assessing Officer is bound to give credit of taxes paid under section 199 and allow refund of tax in accordance with law. [ S.139, 139(9) 199, 237]

Star India (P) Ltd v. ACIT(2023) 224 TTJ 985 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Final assessment order is passed-Assessing Officer had no powers to either withdraw or modify or substitute assessment order passed under section 143(3) with another assessment order. [ S. 144C]

Urvashi Narain v. ITO (2023) 225 TTJ 131/ 156 taxmann.com 189 / (2024) 110 ITR 670 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Limited scrutiny-Unsecured loan-Notice beyond scope of limited scrutiny-CBDT Instruction No. 5/2016, dated 14-7-2016-Assessment is bad in law. [ S. 36(1)(iii), 37(1), 68, 119]

Sukhdham Infrastructures LLP v. ITO (2024) 165 taxmann.com 154 / 226 TTJ 497 (Kol)(Trib.)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Document Identification Number (DIN)-Assessment order without obtaining Document Identification Number (DIN) is invalid-No jurisdiction-Order passed without issuing the notice u/s 143(2)-Order is quashed.[ S.143(2), 144, 147]

Bangalore Narayan Das v. ITO (IT) (2023) 157 taxmann.com 605 / 226 TTJ 66 (Bang)(Trib.)

S. 142(2A) : Inquiry before assessment-Special audit-Additional ground is admitted-Order is barred by limitation.[ S. 153B, 254(1)

Dy.CIT v. Shan Lal Arora (2023) 225 TTJ 289 (Chd)(Trib) Rajiv Kumar v. ACIT (2023) 225 TTJ 289 (Chd)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Purchase of shares from Associated Enterprise-DCF method-Adjustment is deleted-Transactions under taken by the promoters / share holders of the company-Sale of shares using CUP method-Gap of three months-Matter remanded to the TPO.[ R. 10B(5)]

TPG Growth II Market PTE Ltd. v. Dy. CIT(2023) 224 TTJ 789 /153 taxmann.com 368 (Mum)(Trib)