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. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-DRP can give directions only in pending assessment proceedings; once assessment order is passed, DRP would have no power to pass any directions contemplated under sub-section (5) of section 144C-Direction issue by DRP is quashed. [S.92CA(3), Art. 226]

Undercarriage and TractorParts (P.) Ltd v. DRP [2023] 156 taxmann.com 79/ [2024] 460 ITR 401 (Bom)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Opportunity of hearing-Request for personal hearing is not granted-Rejection of request for video conferencing is violation of principles of natural justice-Assessment order and demand notice set aside-Directed to provide opportunity of being heard. [S. 143(3).144B (7), 156, Art.226]

Vasupujya Infrastructures LLP v.NFAC(2024)460 ITR 363 (Guj)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Notices sent to E-Mail address furnished by assessee registered on Department’s portal-Order of assessment is valid.[S. 144, 147, 148, Art. 226]

P. M. Agency v.ITO (2024)460 ITR 224 /160 taxmann.com 674 (Ker)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Principles of Natural justice-Ineffective hearing during video conferencing due to technical glitches-Order passed without granting requested rescheduling of video conference to explain complexity of material submitted-Assessment order and consequent notice of demand set Aside-The Department is at liberty to proceed with the assessment under the provisions of section 144B in accordance with law after issuance of show-cause notice-cum-draft assessment order and providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. [S. 143(3), 156, Art. 226]

Leela Trade Link Pvt. Ltd. v.NFAC [2023] 156 taxmann.com 50/(2024)460 ITR 370 (Guj)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Natural justice-Limitation-Effect Of Standard Operating Procedure-Notice giving less than seven days for reply-Barred By Limitation-Order and consequential notices are set aside-Matter is remanded to the stage of notice and the petitioner is permitted to file his response. [S. 142(1), 143(3), 144,Art. 226]

Doreswamaiah Sureshbabu v. NFAC [2023] 155 taxmann.com 13 / (2024)460 ITR 429 (Karn)(HC)

S.143(3): Assessment-Natural justice-Order passed without giving adequate opportunity to be heard-Not valid-Leave is granted to file reply in response to show cause notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act. [S. 142(1), Art. 226]

Dauphin Travel Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2024)460 ITR 589 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 115JB : Company-Book profit-Amounts transferred to statutory reserve fund is includible.

Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. v. ITO (OSD) (2024)460 ITR 66 (Mad)(HC)

S. 92CA : Transfer pricing-Reference to Transfer Pricing Officer-Arm’s Length price-Avoidance of tax-Transactions with Associated Enterprises-Arm’s length price-Question of fact-No substantial question of law.[S.92C, 260A, R.10B(2)(a)]

PCIT v. Omniglobe Information Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2023] 156 taxmann.com 340/ (2024)460 ITR 249 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax- International transaction-Failure to furnish evidence-No substantial question of law.[S. 260A, R. 10B, 10C]

Akzo Nobel India Pvt. Ltd. v Add. CIT [2022] 145 taxmann.com 468 / (2024)460 ITR 477 (Delhi)(HC)

S.80IA: Industrial undertakings-Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development-Eligible profits-Captive power plant-Rate at which power supplied to own unit-Market value of supply power to State Electricity Board.

CIT v. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. [2009] 180 Taxman 543/ (2024)460 ITR 159 (P&H)(HC)