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. 142(2A) : Inquiry before assessment-Special audit-Extension of time-Cannot be exercised by the Commissioner-Order of Tribunal is affirmed.[S.142(2A)(C), 260A]

PCIT v. B.L. Kashyap and Sons Ltd. (2024) 297 Taxman 13/ 469 ITR 504 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 139 : Return of income-Delay in filing return-Pendency of ruling before Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR)-Genuine hardship-Delay is condoned-Directed to pay cost of Rs 50000 each petition. [S.119(2)(b), 245R(2), Art. 226]

Tiong Woon Project & Contracting Pte. Ltd. v. CBDT (2024) 297 Taxman 434 /463 ITR 641 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 139 : Return of income-Invalid return-Condonation of delay-Central Board of Direct Taxes-Genuine hardship should be construed in a liberal manner-Delay is directed to be condoned [S. 119(2)(b), 139(9) Art. 226]

Optra Health (P.) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (HQ) (2024) 297 Taxman 481 / 462 ITR 238/336 CTR 489 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 127 : Power to transfer cases-Search and seizure-Transfer from Hyderabad to Mumbai-Opportunity of hearing was given-Transfer is justified-Writ petition dismissed. [Art. 226]

Akshara Enterprises (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2024) 297 Taxman 422 / 339 CTR 380 (Tel.)(HC)

S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Compensation wrongly shown as taxable-Application for condonation of delay of revised return-Genuine hardship-Refusing to condone the delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this, when the delay is condoned, the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties-Delay is condoned-Directed to decide on merits. [S. 119(2)(b),143(1), Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Art.226]

K. S. Bilawala v. PCIT (2024) 297 Taxman 464 /463 ITR 766 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 115A : Foreign companies-Tax-Dividends-Royalty-Technical services fees-Determination of tax in certain cases-New agreement and not extension of the licence and Technical Assistance agreement tax rate is 10.56% under section 115A instead of 20 % under the India-Italy DTAA-No substantial question of law. [S.9(1)(vi),260A, art. 12]

CIT (IT) v. Piaggio & C.S.P.A (2024) 297 Taxman 9 (Bom)(HC)

S. 92CA : Transfer pricing-Reference to Transfer Pricing Officer-Arm’s Length price-No interest was paid to creditor or supplier nor any interest has been earned from unrelated party-Deletion of addition by the Tribunal is affirmed-SLP of Revenue is dismissed.[Art. 136]

PCIT v. Boeing India Pvt. Ltd.[2024] 297 Taxman 225 (SC). Editorial : PCIT v. Boeing India Pvt. Ltd. (2023)457 ITR 84/146 taxmann.com 131 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-AMP expenses in respect of products of AE-Comparables chosen by TPO had a net margin lower than that registered by assessee, no upward adjustment was required to be made. [S.92CA, 260A]

PCIT v. Sony India (P.) Ltd (2024) 297 Taxman 118 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax- International transaction-Transfer Pricing Officer is not empowered to hold transaction as sham transaction-The questions of law with respect to the powers and jurisdiction of Transfer Pricing Officer are kept open for being considered in an appropriate case. [S.92CA, Art. 136]

CIT v. IGE & CNCC (Joint Venture) (2024) 297 Taxman 293/461 ITR 266 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. IGE & CNCC (Joint Venture)(2015) 64 taxmann.com 484 (Hyd)(HC)

S. 90 :Double taxation relief-A notification under section 90(1) would be a mandatory condition to give effect to a DTAA, or any protocol changing its terms or conditions, which would have effect of altering existing provisions of law; for a party to claim benefit of a same treatment clause, based on entry of DTAA between India and another state which is member of OECD, relevant date would be entering into treaty with India and not a later date, when, after entering into DTAA with India, such country becomes an OECD member, in terms of India’s practice-OECD Model Convention-art, 24-Writ petition is dismissed. [ITR. 128, Art. 226]

Societe De Participations Financieres Et Industrielles Spafi(2024) 297 Taxman 75 (Delhi)(HC)