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. 271B : Penalty-Failure to get accounts audited-University-Local authority-Failure to get accounts audited not to result in penalty but only in denial of exemption-Penalty not sustainable. [S. 10(23C)(iiiab), 12A(1)(b), 44AB]
National Law University v. Add. CIT (2023)104 ITR 56 (SN)(Delhi) (Trib)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Notice not specifying the charge-Notice not valid. [S. 274]
Right Tight Fastners P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023)104 ITR 41 (SN)(Mum) (Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Interest paid to customer-No details are filed in the course of assessment proceedings.[S. 143(3)]
Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank v. P CIT (2023)104 ITR 70 (SN.)(Pat) (Trib)
S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Revised grounds-Additional evidence-Matter remanded.
Prakalpa Automotives P. Ltd. v. ITO (2023)104 ITR 3 (SN)(Bang) (Trib)
S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Appeals-Delay of 1005 days-Delay due to negligence, lethargy or inaction on part of assessee-Delay is not condoned. [S. 254]
Mass Awash P. Ltd. v. Add. CIT(IT) (2023)104 ITR 14 (SN)(Delhi) (Trib)
S. 201 : Deduction at source-Failure to deduct or pay-Short deduction-Assessee in default-Retainership fees-Matter remanded.[S. 197-201(1), 201(IA)]
HT Mobile Solutions Ltd. v. JCIT (2023) 104 ITR 44 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib)
S. 194C : Deduction at source-Contractors-Year end provision for expenses-Payee is not identifiable-Invoices received next year-Provision is reversed-Tax deducted at source-Assessee Could not be treated as in default for mere book entries in absence of ascertainable amount and identifiable payee. [S. 194I, 194J-201(1),201(IA)]
HT Mobile Solutions Ltd. v. JCIT (2023)104 ITR 44 (SN)(Delhi) (Trib)
S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Additional ground is admitted-Six years to be reckoned prior to date of receipt of seized material of other person-Seized document handed over to Assessing Officer on 18-9-2018-Six years to be reckoned from AY. 2013-14 to 2018-19-Assessment for the assessment year 2011-12-2012-13 is bad in law hence quashed. [S. 132, 254(1)]
Asst. CIT v. Dr. D. Y. Patil Education Society (2023)104 ITR 296 (Mum)(Trib)
S. 153A : Assessment-Search-No incriminating material is found-Proceedings is held to be invalid-No failure to disclose material facts-Reassessment proceedings in valid-Books of account not rejected-Addition on account of alleged increase in margin is deleted. [S.28(i), 145-148-148]
ABCI Infrastructure P. Ltd. v. ACIT (2023)104 ITR 255 (Guwahti) (Trib)
S. 147 : Reassessment-Validity-Estimate of value of assets by Valuation Officer-Transfer of Development Rights-Valuation referred to Valuation Cell-Subject matter of appeal-Limitation–Order of reassessment passed on ground time-limit would expire without waiting for Report-incorrect-Order is bad in law. [S. 142A(7)-143(3), 148, 153]
ITO v. Neumec Builders And Developers (2023)104 ITR 62 (SN)(Mum)(Trib)