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.153A: Assessment -Search -Less than 50 lakhs -Assessment beyond six years is bad in law. [S.69, 132]

Kawaljit Singh v. ACIT (2024) 204 ITD 307 (Chd)(Trib)

S.151 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Sanction for issue of notice -The absence of proper authorization from the designated officer renders the notice of reassessment under section 148 null and void from the outset, warranting its dismissal.[S. 127, 147, 148]

Chirag Mishrimal Hirani v. Dy. CIT [2024] 109 ITR 40 (SN) (Surat)(Trib)

S. 147 : Reassessment -Borrowed satisfaction- The reopening of an assessment solely on borrowed satisfaction, devoid of independent scrutiny, lacks validity.[S. 148]

Dinesh Gangwal v. ITO [2024] 109 ITR 42 (SN) (Kol)(Trib)

S.147: Reassessment – Information from investigation wing -Borrowed satisfaction -Cash deposits -Reassessment order is set aside. [S. 143(3), 148]

Ujjala Suppliers P. Ltd. v. ITO [2024] 109 ITR 16 (SN)(Kol)(Trib)

S. 147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – No failure to disclose material facts -Reassessment is bad in law. [S. 148 149(1)(b)]

Dy. CIT v. Satya Securities Ltd. [2024] 109 ITR 700 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 145: Method of accounting -Addition cannot be made on account of Low GP.

Dy. CIT v. Kortek Electronics (India) Ltd. [2024] 109 ITR 276 (Delhi) (Trib)

S.144C: Reference to dispute resolution panel -Passing draft assessment order -AO passed final assessment order instead of draft assessment order -Invalid order -Order quashed. [S.92CA(3), 144C(4), 153]

Panasonic Life Solutions India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [2024] 205 ITD 139/ 227 TTJ 367 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel -Objection is filed before DRP after due date of time allowed for filing objections- AO should carry proceedings to finalize assessment order as per provisions of section -Assessment order was barred by limitation and treated as void. [S.92CA(3), 144C(4), 153]

Mavenir UK Holdings v. ACIT [2024] 205 ITD 1 (Delhi) (Trib)

S.143(3) :Assessment – Signing of an assessment order by Assessing Officer is a mandatory – Not curable procedural defect -Unsigned assessment order is invalid. [S. 282(2) 282A, 292B, Rule 127A, Code of Civil Procedure 1908, Order -XX Rule 3]

Reuters Asia Pacific Ltd. v. DCIT [2024] 205 ITD 31/ 228 TTJ 165/110 ITR 609 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 143(3): Assessment – Person -Amalgamation- The amalgamation of the assessee company with another entity leads to the cessation of the assessee company’s status as a legal entity under section 2(31) of the Act- Substantive illegality and not a procedural violation- Order is invalid. [S. 2(31)]

Solvent Real Estate P. Ltd. v. ITO [2024] 109 ITR 52 (SN.) (Kol) (Trib)