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. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Principle of natural justice-Video conference not provided-Matter remanded to Assessing Officer to pass fresh assessment order after giving opportunity of hearing to assessee by video conferencing. [S. 68, Art. 226]
Bangabasi Collage v. UOI (2023) 295 Taxman 727 / (2024) 462 ITR 93 (Cal.)(HC)
S. 144B : Faceless assessment-Amendment by Finance Act of 2022 — Does not curtail benefits to the assessee — Amendment valid-Natural justice-Opportunity of the hearing was not granted-Reassessment was not valid-Order was set aside-SLP of assessee is dismissed. [S. 144B(7), 144B(9), Art. 136]
Sapna Flour Mills Ltd. v. UOI (2023) 295 Taxman 119 (SC) Editorial: Sapna Flour Mills Ltd. v. UOI (2023) 451 ITR 521/ 332 CTR 361/ 225 DTR 13/ (2022) 145 taxmann.com 557 / (All)(HC)
S. 144 : Best judgment assessment- Notice issued in a email address which is not in use-Order is set aside-Directed to pass a fresh assessment order after issuance oof a formal show cause notice at correct e-mail address. [S. 147, 148, Art. 226]
Bengal & Assam Company Ltd. v. NFAC (2023) 295 Taxman 45 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 143(3) : Assessment-Document identification number-Order passed manually-Order is set aside-Remanded to Assessing Officer for de novo consideration and to pass a final assessment order. [Art. 226]
Royal India Corporation Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 295 Taxman 485 /[2024] 462 ITR 495 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 143(3) : Assessment-Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Order of Tribunal directing the Assessing Officer to estimate the gross pprofit at rate of 12.5 % is affirmed. [S. 69C, 260A]
PCIT v. Suraj Infrastructures (P.) Ltd. (2023) 295 Taxman 758 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 143(3) : Assessment-Bogus purchases-Accommodation entries-Trading in diamonds-Cash credits-Unexplained expenditure-Order of Tribunal affirming disallowance of 6 percent of disputed purchases is affirmed. [S.68, 69]
PCIT v. Vrajendra Jagjivandas Thakkar (2023) 295 Taxman 713 (Guj.)(HC)
S. 142(2A) : Inquiry before assessment-Special audit-Reassessment notice issued on the basis of Audit report-Once again notice to Special audit-Notice is quashed by High Court-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 44AB, 143(3), 148 Art. 136]
Dy. CIT v. Multi Commodity Exchange of India Ltd. (2023) 456 ITR 772 / 295 Taxman 318 (SC) Editorial: Multi Commodity Exchange of India Ltd v. Dy.CIT (2018) 100 taxmann.com 180/ 12 ITR-OL 658 / 171 DTR 289/ (2019) 306 CTR 245 (Bom)(HC)
S. 139 : Return of income-Amalgamation-Revised return-Directed the Assessing Officer to accept the manual return and pass the order accordingly-170A was applicable only from assessment year 2022-23 onwards, [S.119(2)(b), 139(5), 170A, Art. 226]
Bajaj Electricals Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 295 Taxman 449 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Delay in filing of return-Refund-Genuine hardship-Condonation of delay-Matter remanded to Board to consider the application for condonation of delay in its proper perspective. [S. 119(2)(b), 139(4), Art. 226]
R.K. Madhani Prakash Engineers J V v. UOI (2023) 458 ITR 48 / 295 Taxman 48 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Form No 10IC-Condonation of delay-Directed to dispose the application within a period of six weeks-Stay application-Assessing Officer is directed to consider and dispose of application within a period of eight weeks [S. 115BAA,220, Art. 226]
Metroark (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2023) 459 ITR 788/ 295 Taxman 504 (Cal.)(HC)