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. 2(9) : Benami Property transactions-Benami Transaction (Position prior to 1-11-2016)-Transaction which took place prior to 1-11-2016-Order of High Court is affirmed. [Art. 226]
ACIT v. Nutrient Marine Foods Ltd. (2023) 293 Taxman 602 (SC) Editorial : Nutrient Marine Foods Ltd v. Adjudicating Authority (2023) 152 taxmann.com 86 (Telengana)(HC)
S. 2(9): Benami Property transactions-Section 2(9) of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 being prospective in nature, it could not be applied to transaction which took place prior to 1-11-2016. [Art. 226]
Nutrient Marine Foods Ltd v. Adjudicating Authority (2023) 152 taxmann.com 86 (Telengana)(HC) Editorial : SLP of Revenue was dismissed, ACIT v. Nutrient Marine Foods Ltd. (2023) 293 Taxman 602 (SC)
S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-High Court dismissed the petition to quash the proceedings. [S. 200, 204, 278B]
Petrus Lambertus Maria Hermans v. ACIT (TDS) (2023) 293 Taxman 176/334 CTR 933 // (2024) 460 ITR 513 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Penalty notice provided less than 24 hours to assessee to appear in person or through authorized representative-Shorter period could be termed as a pure and simple breach of principles of natural justice-Assessing Officer was to be directed to give an opportunity of hearing to assessee from stage where it was left-Matter remanded.[Art. 226]
Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 293 Taxman 189 (Guj.)(HC)
S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Reassessment-Pendency of writ petition-Revision petition filed by assessee against reassessment order was to be decided.[S. 143(3), 147, 264(4)(a), Art. 226]
Ratan Industries Ltd. v. PCIT (2023) 293 Taxman 690 (All.)(HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cash credits-Share capital-Unsecured loans-Record-Principal Commissioner had to examine all records pertaining to assessment year at time of examination by him, which included, post-search assessment proceedings and thereafter only if he found that order passed by Assessing Officer on any issue was erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to interest of revenue-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order is affirmed.[S. 68, 153A]
PCIT v. Techno Tracom (P.) Ltd. (2023) 293 Taxman 392/334 CTR 820/ 226 CTR 185/(2024) 461 ITR 47 (Cal.)(HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Provision for doubtful debts-Air-conditioning charges-Employees contributions(EPF/ ESI-Assessing Officer followed the order of jurisdictional High Court-Order in Checkmate Services (P) Ltd (2023) 290 Taxman 19/(2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) is considered-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order is affirmed. [S. 36(1)(va), 37 (1)]
PCIT v. SPPL Property Management (P.) Ltd. (2023) 293 Taxman 458 (Cal.)(HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Business expenditure-Specific query was raised in the original assessment proceedings-Mere failure to issue notice under section 133(6) did not warrant exercise of jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act-Order of Tribunal is affirmed.[S. 37(1), 143(3)]
PCIT v. R.K. Jain Infra Projects (P.) Ltd. (2023) 293 Taxman 465 /(2024) 464 ITR 555(Delhi)(HC)/Editorial: SLP of Revenue is dismissed , PCIT v. R.K. Jain Infra Projects (P.) Ltd ( 2024) 297 Taxman 369 /464 ITR 584( SC)
S. 245C : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Case-There was no case pending in relation to assessment years on date of respective applications-Any proceeding for assessment under this Act-Application for the Assessment year 2012-13 and 2013-14 are held to be not maintainable-Applications in respect of assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17 were maintainable because in terms of Explanation (iv) proceedings for said assessment years were not concluded on date on which assessees had filed their respective applications-Order of Settlement Commission was affirmed.[S.148, 245A,Art. 226]
Sushil Kumar Goyal v. P CIT (2023) 293 Taxman 653 /333 CTR 464/ 226 DTR 345 (Delhi)(HC)