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-Additional bonus liability-Amnesty return-Merely raising claim subsequently found inadmissible in law would not amount to concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars-Penalty unsustainable.[S. 43B]
Carona Ltd v Dy. CIT (2025) 478 ITR 1 /176 taxmann.com 983 (Bom)(HC)
S. 264 :Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Failure to respond questions-Hospitalisation-Genuine reasons-Rejection of application was quashed. [Art. 226]
Saremal Jain v. PCIT (2025) 478 ITR 472 (Karn)(HC)
S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Penalty Concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars thereof-Specific charge-Assessing Officer recording satisfaction under section 271AAB and not under section 271(1)(c) during assessment proceedings-Revisional authority’s direction to initiate proceedings under section 271(1)(c) without such satisfaction unsustainable-Tribunal justified in setting aside revisional order.[S. 260A, 271(1)(c), 271AAB.]
PCIT v. Ram Kishan Verma (2025) 478 ITR 727 /174 taxmann.com 239 / 345 CTR 68 / 250 DTR 289 (Raj)(HC) PCIT v. Harish Jain (2025) 478 ITR 727 /174 taxmann.com 239 // 345 CTR 68 / 250 DTR 289 (Raj)(HC) PCIT v. Manoj Kunar Sharma 2025) 478 ITR 727 /174 taxmann.com 239 // 345 CTR 68 / 250 DTR 289 (Raj)(HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Penalty concealment-Satisfaction need not be recorded in particular form-Order dropping penalty proceedings can be revised.[S. 271 (1)(c)]
PCIT v. R.A. Himmatsingka and Co.(2025) 478 ITR 456 /178 taxmann.com 135 (Patna)(HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
-Finding by Tribunal that proper enquiry had been conducted-order was not prejudicial to Revenue Order of revision not valid.[S. 260A]
PCIT v. Sarita Gupta(Ms) [2024] 163 taxmann.com 8 / (2025) 478 ITR 446 (All)(HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Consortium of private entities not a statutory body-Deduction wrongly allowed by AO-Revision justified-Order of Tribunal set aside. [S.80IA(4) Expl. 263]
PCIT v. Celebi Delhi Cargo Management India Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 478 ITR 82 / 172 taxmann.com 3 (Delhi)(HC).
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Number of partners exceeded 20-Remuneration to partners-Commissioner not showing how order of Assessing Officer prejudicial-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order was affirmed. [S.40(b)]
CIT v. Deloitte haskins and sells (2025) 478 ITR 21 /305 Taxman 605 (Mad)(HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cash credits-Share application money-Second revisionary order-Order of Tribunal setting aside second revisionary order is affirmed-SLP of revenue dismissed. [S. 68, 143(3), Art. 136]
Pr. CIT v. Rani Sati Agro Tech Pvt. Ltd.(2025) 478 ITR 229 /304 Taxman 584 (SC) Editorial : PCIT v. Rani Sati Agro Tech Pvt. Ltd [2024] 298 Taxman 498 / (2025) 478 ITR 225 (Cal)(HC)
S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Duties-Cash credits-Share application money-Deleting additions without assigning reasons-Matter remanded to Tribunal to consider afresh and pass reasoned order.[S 68, 260A]
PCIT v. One Point Commercial Pvt. Ltd [2024] 161 taxmann.com 737 / (2025) 478 ITR 183 (Cal)(HC)
S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Appeals-Delay of 530 days in filing appeal-Delay because assessee was pursuing rectification and review options-Delay must be condoned-Matter remanded to the Tribunal to decide on merits. [S. 80P(2)(a)(i), 260A]
Sidharth Co-operative Credit and Thrift Society Ltd v. ITO (2025) 478 ITR 424 (Chhattigarh)(HC)