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. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited scrutiny-Commissioner presumed that the Limited scrutiny case was converted into full scrutiny-Unsecured loan-Revision order was quashed.[S. 68]
Sanjeev Garg. v. Pr. CIT (2025) 213 ITD 199 /236 TTJ 686 (Chd) (Trib.)
S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Application of income-Donation to another charitable trust-Revision order affirmed. [S. 11, 12A]
Save A Family Plan (India) Aiswaryagram v. DCIT (E) (2025) 213 ITD 27 (Cochin) (Trib.)
S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Penalty-Concealment-Without valid approval of Joint Commissioner-Miscellaneous application of revenue was dismissed. [S.271(1)(c)]
ACIT v. Vaibhav Pankaj Shah. (2025) 213 ITD 625 (Mum) (Trib.)
S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Tribunal held that amended provisions of section 115BBE are prospective in nature and not applicable for assessment year 2017-18-Miscellaneous application filed by revenue for rectification of said order of Tribunal was dismissed. [S. 68 to 69D, 115 BBE]
DCIT v. Sanjaybhai Mansukhbhai Patel. (2025) 213 ITD 470 (Surat) (Trib.)
S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Settled under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024, read with sections 91 and 92 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024-Declaration and particulars to be furnished-Pending appeal of assessee filed before Tribunal was allowed to be withdrawn. [Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 read with sections 91 and 92 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, S.91, 92]
LM Wind Power Blades (India) (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 213 ITD 408 (Bang) (Trib)
S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Credit for tax deducted at source-Additional evidence admitted and matter remanded to the file of CIT(A) to decide in accordance with law. [S. 199]
Anil Vasantrao Deshpande. v.NFAC(2025) 213 ITD 450 (Panaji) (Trib.)
S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Delay of 464 days-Affidavit-Delay was condoned-CIT(A)-Ex-parte order-Not dealing on merits-Matter remanded to the file of CIT(A) to decide on merits.[S.250(6)]
Ananda Kondu Akhade v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 260 (Pune)(Trib.)
S. 251: Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Direction to file the rectification application-Matter remanded to the file of CIT (A) for proper adjudication of claim under section DTAA. [S.90, 154, Rule 128, Article 24 of OECD Model Convention, Form 67]
Suresh Krishnamoorthy. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 419 (Cochin) (Trib)
S. 250: Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Ex-parte order-Violation of the principle of natural justice-The matter was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for consideration of the assessee’s plea. [S. 144, 153A]
Bharat Chaturbhuj Vedant. v. DCIT (2025) 213 ITD 556 (Jodhpur) (Trib.)
S. 250: Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Ex-parte order by CIT(A)-Reassessment-Land development-Directed to provide one more opportunity of hearing. [S. 45, 147, 148]
Kaushalya Devi. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 159 (Kol) (Trib.)