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. 145 : Method of accounting-Business income-Valuation of closing stock-Consistent application of cost or net realisable value method – Order of Tribunal deleting the addition is affirmed. [S.28(i)]
PCIT v. Sony India Pvt. Ltd [2024] 167 taxmann.com 549 ( /(2025) 477 ITR 576 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 143(3): Assessment- Excess stock – Violation of principle of natural justice – Order of assessment was quashed and set aside-Existence of alternate remedy-Not an absolute bar for issue of writ Violation of principles of natural justice. [S.69B, Art. 226]
Smart Furniture v. Dy. CIT [2024] 161 taxmann.com 444 /(2025) 477 ITR 527 (Mad)(HC)
S. 143(3): Assessment-Jurisdiction-Transfer of case-Notice issued by Assessing Officer from whose jurisdiction case was transferred-Notice not valid.[S. 260A, 263]
PCIT v. Ojasvi Motor Finance Pvt. Ltd [2024] 163 taxmann.com 80 / (2025) 477 ITR 448 (Cal)(HC)
S. 143(3): Assessment-Failure of assessee to update e-mail ID resulting in non-receipt of-Own fault- No violation of principles of natural justice-Order valid- Given liberty to file statutory appeal. [S. 144B, 246A, Art. 226]
Lakeshore Hospital and Research Centre Ltd. v.Add. CIT (2025) 447 ITR 337 (Ker)(HC)
S. 132 : Search and seizure-Reasonable belief- All three conditions must be satisfied-Satisfaction note – Failure to disclose capital gains–Absence of jurisdictional pre-requisites for exercise of power under section 132 Search and seizure illegal Revenue granted liberty to initiate reassessment proceedings in accordance with law–Warrant of authorisation quashed and subsequent search and seizure illegal-Competent authority not empowered to issue notice under section 131 (1) after initiation of search and seizure under section 132(1) Notice issued after search and seizure unsustainable-Interpretation of taxing statutes Strict interpretation and compliance.[S 45, 55(2)(ac), 131(1), 132, 147, 148, Art. 226]
Pramod Swarup Agarwal v. PDIT (Inv) (2025) 477 ITR 453 /305 Taxman 314(All)(HC) Sneh Lata Agarwal v. PDIT (Inv) (2025) 477 ITR 453 /305 Taxman 314(All)(HC)
S. 127 : Power to transfer cases-Facilitate co-ordinated investigation of cases-Order of transfer was valid.[Art. 126]
Akshara Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 477 ITR 121 (Telengana )(HC)
S. 115JB : Company-Book profit -Expenditure towards corporate social responsibility-No basis for excluding expenditure on corporate social responsibility for determining book profits-Book profits to be determined as per accounts maintained in accordance with law Income-tax Act.
PCIT v. Sony India Pvt. Ltd [2024] 167 taxmann.com 549 ( /(2025) 477 ITR 576 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 92C : Transfer pricing – Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Specified domestic transaction-Entertainment business- Royalty Payment-Transfer Pricing Officer cannot examine commercial expediency. Royalty payable under licence agreement. No question of law arose regarding disallowance on account of royalty paid by assessee to associated enterprises. Order of Tribunal affirmed. [S. 9(1)(vi), 260A]
PCIT v. Sony India Pvt. Ltd [2024] 167 taxmann.com 549 ( /(2025) 477 ITR 576 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 92C : Transfer pricing – Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Specified domestic transaction-Arm’s length price-No substantial question of law.[S. 260A]
PCIT v. Phoenix Comtrade Pvt. Ltd [2024] 162 taxmann.com 99 ( /(2025) 477 ITR 498 (Bom)(HC)
S. 92C : Transfer pricing – Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Specified domestic transaction-Principle of natural justice-Notice and grant of approval by Principal Commissioner quashed and set aside-Matter remanded to Assessing Officer for considering matter afresh after hearing assessee and thereafter to pass speaking order.[S.92CA(1), 92CA(2), 92CA(3), Art. 226]
Axis Bank Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 477 ITR 297/ 304 Taxman 538 (Guj)(HC)