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. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Additions during reassessment-Reasons recorded for reopening assessment and additions made on different grounds. A.O. failed to prove that assessee concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income-Additions deleted-Penalty deleted.[S. 133(6), 147, 148]

Babita Devi Kajoria v. ITO (2023) 101 ITR 17 (SN) (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Denial of special deduction claimed against income from long term capital gain-No business income shown-High court decision in favour-Deduction admissible-Not a case of furnishing inaccurate particular-Penalty not leviable. [S. 80G, 80HHC, 112(2)]

Atul Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 101 ITR 11 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Slump sale-Exemption-Exemption denied in revision-Computation of book profits objected-Transaction not ‘Transfer’-AO conforming to legal standards to compute books of accounts-Transactions between subsidiaries not amenable to book profits computation-Revision not justified.[S. 45,47(iv), 115JB]

TMF Holdings Ltd. v. PCIT (2023)101 ITR 423 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –Deposit of cash by husband of assessee-sale of plot belonging to father and amount deposited in assessee’s account-AO raising queries and after all verification accepting return of the assessee-Revision is bad in law. [S. 143(3)]

Surinder Kaur (Ms.) v. PCIT (2023)101 ITR 531 (Chd) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited scrutiny assessment-Large share application money received against unallotted shares-AO examining and making necessary verifications-Arrived at plausible view-Revision not warranted.[S. 143(3)]

Sun Developers and Builders P. Ltd. v. PCIT (2023)101 ITR 688 (Raipur) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Deposit of cash during demonetisation-Non-co-operation and noncompliance of assessee to furnish details to A.O.-Estimation of net profit at 5% by AO without any basis and without consulting any records-Revision is valid. [S. 44AD, 144]

Subhadip Gandhi v. ITO (2023) 101 ITR 133 (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Best judgement assessment-Failure to serve notice under 143(2)-Invalid assessment cannot be subject matter of revision.[S. 143(2), 144].

A.K. Santhosh v. Dy. CIT (2023)101 ITR 581 (Cochin) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Business expenditure-Payment in cash in excess of prescribed limit-No dispute as to genuineness of transaction-Assessee taking loan from family members and making payment to sellers of land in cash-Disallowance not attracted to cash transaction for support to family members in immediate business needs-AO did not initiate penalty proceedings after due consideration-Order not prejudicial to revenue-Revision not justified. [S. 40A(3), 44AD, 269SS, 271D]

Raghuveer Singh v. PCIT (2023)101 ITR 306 (Jaipur) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cash deposits during demonetisation-AO raised detailed questions and assessee filed responses-AO applied mind to facts-Order of revision quashed.

Gurcharan Singh v. PCIT (2023)101 ITR 539 (Chd) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital Gains-Exemption-Assessee given one more opportunity-Order of PCIT set aside-Matter remanded-Assessee to furnish all information. [S. 54]

Kanta Chandak (Smt.) v. ITO (2023)101 ITR 6 (Jodhpur) (Trib) Mohan Lal Chandak v. ITO (2023)101 ITR 6 (Jodhpur) (Trib)