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. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Disallowance of claim-Mere filing incorrect claim which was not allowed by Assessing Officer would not attract concealment penalty.

Purshottam Farmers Co. Op Cotton Ginning & Pressing Society Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 203 ITD 698 (Surat) (Trib.)

S.271D : Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Cash loan from relative-Investment in properties-Levy of penalty is deleted. [S. 269SS]

Anil Manhare. v. ITO (2023) 203 ITD 298 (Raipur) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-short-term capital gain on Multiplex sold-Capital gains-Block of assets-Depreciable assets-Service tax-Delay in payment of TDS-Revision order is quashed partly-Employees’ contributions (EPF/ESI)-Revision is affirmed. [S. 36(1)(va), 37(1), 43B , 50, 143(3)]

D.V. Properties (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2023) 203 ITD 283 (Surat) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Interest expenditure-Nexus of interest expenditure with interest income-Revision order is affirmed.[S. 57]

Chomansingh M. Deora. v. PCIT (2023) 203 ITD 240 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Sale of seven flats within three years of acquisition-Revision is held to be justified. [S. 54F , 143(3)]

Madhu Devi Jain. (Smt.) v. ITO (2023) 203 ITD 713 (Hyd) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Interest paid capitalised-Purchase cost-Sale of debentures-Interest salary, etc. paid by firm-Two views possible-Revision order is quashed. [S. 40(b), 45, 55]

Bharatnagar Buildcon LLP. v. PCIT (2023) 203 ITD 539 (Pune) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Employee stock option plan (ESOP)-Capital or revenue-Assessing Officer had taken a plausible view on issue based on existing proposition of law with regard to claim of ESOP expenses, revision is unjustified.[S. 37(1)]

Comtrade Commodities Services Ltd. v. PCIT (2023) 203 ITD 745 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Salaries-Perquisites-Non-deduction of TDS-Collection of license fee in form of house rent allowance from its employees-Unfurnished accommodation-Organization under a Statute enacted by legislature-Provisions of TDS will not apply.[S. 15, 17 , 201(1), 201(IA)]

Employees Provident Fund Organisation. v. DCIT, TDS (2023) 203 ITD 44/ (2024) 227 TTJ 583 (Bang) (Trib.)

S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Interest under section 201(1A) is payable only when there is an obligation to deduct tax-Matter remanded.[S. 191, 194A , 197A , 201(1) , 201(IA), Form 15H]

Bank of India. v. DCIT (TDS) (2023) 203 ITD 10 (Nagpur) (Trib.)

S. 194I : Deduction at source-Rent-Common area maintenance (CAM) charges-Provision of section 194C is applicable and not provision of section 194I. [S.194C , 201(1)]

Welgrow Hotels Concepts (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2023) 203 ITD 595 (Delhi) (Trib.)