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-After the expiry of four years-Cash credits-Search-Deposit of cash in bank-No scrutiny assessment was done-Reassessment notice is held to be justified-Review petition is dismissed [S. 68, 143(1), 147, Art. 226]
Ramakant v. ITO (2023) 333 CTR 786 (Dehi) ( HC) Editorial : Ramakant v. ITO (2023) 333 CTR 791/294 Taxman 48 / 228 DTR 206 (Dehi) ( HC)
S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Principle of natural justice-Only one day time was given to file reply-Matter remanded.[S. 92CA, Art. 226]
Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Add. CIT(2023) 334 CTR 57 (Guj)( HC)
S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Sale of property-Not allowing the relief under section 48-Assessing Officer abdicated his role as adjudicator-Assessment order is quashed and set aside-Assessee is directed to file the return within two weeks. [S. 48, 144, 147
Swagatika Rout v.Chairman, CBDT (2023) 335 CTR 214 / 152 taxmann.com 529 (Orissa)( HC)
S. 144 : Best judgment assessment –Non service of notice-Principle of natural justice-New PAN card-Change of address uploaded-Order and penalty notices are quashed and set aside. [S. 271(1)(b), 271 (1)(c), Art. 226]
Ramya Vivek Iyer v. ITO (2023) 334 CTR 931 (Mad) ( HC)
S. 143(3): Assessment-Cash credits-Share application money-Recovery-National Company Law Tribunal admitted insolvency petition against assessee-Revenue in terms of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 had not lodged its claim with RP-Revenue could not enforce assessment order and demand notice. [S. 68, 156, 220, 271AAC 272A(1)(d), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and regulation 7 of the Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 S. 31]
Rishi Ganga Power Corporation Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (2024) 335 CTR 512/ 158 taxmann.com 72 / (2024) 297 Taxman 123 //464 ITR 133 (Delhi)( HC)
S. 143(3): Assessment-limited scrutiny-Conversion into complete scrutiny-Derogation to Instruction No. 5 of 2016, dt. 14th July, 2016-Order of Tribunal quashing the addition is affirmed-No substantial question of law.[S. 119, 142(1), 143(2), 260A]
PCIT v. Sukhdham Infrastructures LLP (2023) 335 CTR 476(Cal) ( HC)
S. 143(3): Assessment-Amalgamation-Revised return-Change of address-Mistake committed by assesseee-Giving old address instead of new address and email-Matter is remanded. [S. 115BBE, 127, 144B, 282, Art. 226]
Vinplex India (P) Ltd. v. Add.CIT (2023) 155 taxmann.com 116 /334 CTR 926 (Mad) ( HC)
S. 139 : Return of income-Revised return after amalgamation-Effect of order of Tribunal or Court in respect of business reorganisation-Provisions of section 170A, as inserted by Finance Act, 2022, would not apply for assessment year 2021-22, but for and from assessment year 2022-23.[S. 139(5), 170, 170A, Art. 226]
TSI Business Parks Hyderabad (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 333 CTR 561 /151 taxmann.com 514 (Telangana) (HC)
S. 132 : Search and seizure –Block assessment-Validity of search proceedings-Satisfaction note was not produced before the Court in spite of specific direction given by the Court-All proceedings including the prosecution are quashed-Court also observed that the order does not preclude the Revenue from taking any such proceedings as they may be so advised and to utilise the information or material in such proceedings against the assessee as is permissible in law. [S. 132, 153A, 158BC, 158BFA, 276C, 277, 278B, Art. 226]
ACIT v. Marico Industries Ltd.(2023) 334 CTR 201 (Bom) ( HC) Marico Industries Ltd v. ACIT ( 2023) 334 CTR 201 (Bom)( HC)