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-Depreciation-Capitalised and treated as revenue receipts-Explained the difference of depreciation-Revision order is set aside.[ S. 32]

M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 225 TTJ 57(UO) (Indore)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Source of cash-Neither the Assessing Officer not PCIT examined the source of cash-The matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer to the limited extent to verify the cash available for making deposits in the bank. [ S.68, 143(3)]

Sahebganj No 1 Anchalik Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd v. ITO (2023) 225 TTJ 19 (UO) (Kol)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Mark to Market (MTM)-Specific query in the course of assessment proceedings-Loss was reversed in subsequent year-Revision order is quashed. [ S. 43(5)(d), 143(3)]

Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra)Ltd v. PCIT(2023) 225 TTJ 137 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue–Invalid assessment-Notice under section 143(2) is not served-Reassessment is bad in law-Issue of shares-Share capital-Order was passed after detailed investigation-Revision is bad in law.[ S. 56, 68, 143(2), 147, 148]

Garud Credit & Holding (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2023) 226 TTJ 989 (Kol)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Merger-Interest free funds-Issue is subject matter of appeal before CIT(A)-Revision is bad in law-Transfer pricing-Section 92BA(i) is omitted.w.e.f. I st April, 2017 No ALP is required to be determined in respect of a domestic transaction-No reference was required to the TPO-Revision is bad in law. [ S.14A, 40A(2), 92BA, 92C, R.8D]

IMC Ltd v. PCIT (2023) 226 TTJ 180 (Kol)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Show cause notice-Advertisement expenses-Without issuing show cause notice cannot direct the Assessing Officer to verify the bills and vouchers. [ S.40(a)(ia), 40A(3), 143(3)]

Kalinga Institute of Social Sciences (KISS) v. CIT (2023) 226 TTJ 957 (Cuttack)(Trib)

S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Subsequent decision of Supreme Court-Delayed payment of employees contribution towards ESI and EPF-Orders allowing the appeals are recalled. [ S. 2(24)(x), 36(1)(va), 43B]

Dy.CIT v. N.R.Wires (P) Ltd (2023) 224 TTJ 450 (Raipur)(Trib)

S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Subsequent Supreme Court decision-Contribution to ESI and PF-Paid before due date of filing of return-Miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue is dismissed. [ S. 36(1)(va),139(1), 143(1)]

Dy.CIT v. Suman Solanki (2023) 225 TTJ 377 (Jaipur)(Trib)

S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Appeals-Delay of 3966 days-Condoned-Cost of Rs 20000 is imposed on Revenue to be paid to Prime Minister National Relief fund-Bad debt-Reassessment-On merit the matter remanded to the file of the CIT(A) to decide a fresh in accordance with law. [ S.36(1)(vii), 143(3), 147, 148, 154, 253(5), 254(1)]

Dy.CIT v. Chhattishgarh State Electricity Board (2023) 226 TTJ 861 (Raipur)(Trib)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Direction to initiate penalty proceedings-No proceedings were pending before CIT(A)-Direction to initiate penalty proceedings after culmination of appellate proceedings are without jurisdiction.[ S. 154, 250, 270A]

Bhuramal Rajmal Surana & Sons (P) Ltd v. ACIT(2023) 225 TTJ 122 (SMC)(Jaipur)(Trib)