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. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Limitation-Period to be reckoned from date of receipt of books of account, documents or seizure of assets by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer of non-searched person-Commissioner (Appeals) considering limitation period from date of search-Notice is barred by limitation.[S. 132, 132A]

Sarangabani Kirubakaran v. Dy. CIT (2024) 115 ITR 28 (SN) (Chennai)(Trib)

S. 153B : Assessment-Search-Time limit-Limitation-Last panchanama-Subsequent panchnama revoking prohibitory order without seizure of material-Time limit is not extended-Restraint order not lifted within one month of assessment order-Central Board Of Direct Taxes instruction-Release of prohibitory order,panchnama and assessment order is invalid-Central Board Of Direct Taxes Circular, Dated 3-7-2002-Last panchnama cancellation of restraint order-Second Panchnama is not last panchnama of conclusion of search-Electronic documents used as evidence-Mandatory conditions of Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act is not complied with-Not admissible evidence-Bogus purchases-Cash purchase of tobacco from grey market-Estimation of profit at 12.5 Per Cent. is proper. [S. 132(3), 132(8A), 143(3) 153A, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, S.65B (2)(d), 65B(4)]

Polisetty Somasundaram v. Dy. CIT (2024) 115 ITR 548 (Visakhapatnam) (Trib)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Additional ground admitted-Seized document related to third party-Proceedings to be transferred to Assessing Officer of third party-No satisfaction note prepared and no proceeding under Sectionb153C is initiated-Employee of searched company-Proceedings under section 153A is invalid. [S. 132, 153C]

Dy. CIT v. Sushil Tyagi (2024) 115 ITR 90 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Limitation–Notice issued on 30-6-2021 will not relate back to original date where limitation expired on 31-3-2021-Notice is barred by limitation-Order and consequential notice is set aside-Information from Investigation wing-Accommodation entries-Charges are incorrect-Assessment made without application of mind-Notice and order is quashed. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d)]

Venkateswar Medicare P. Ltd. v. ITO (2024)115 ITR 325 /231 TTJ 791 / 169 taxmann.com 460 (Kol)(Trib)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Delay condoned-Additional ground-Earlier orders passed on basis of notice under Section 148 is not existing on date of notice-Assessment is invalid and quashed.[S. 147, 253(5), ITATR. 11]

G D Mother Educational Society v. ACIT (2024)115 ITR 594 / [2025] 170 taxmann.com 667 (Kol)(Trib)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Limitation-Interest-Notice and proceedings initiated beyond prescribed time-limit-Barred by limitation. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 149 (1)(b)]

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (IT) (2024) 115 ITR 113 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice issued in the name of dead person-Reassessment is bad in law and quashed.[S. 147, 159(2)(b), 159(3)]

Estate of Arjun Das Agarwal v. ITO (2024)115 ITR 467 (Kol)(Trib)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Change of opinion-Issue dealt in original assessment proceedings-Reassessment is quashed. [S.11, 12AA 148]

Dy. CIT (E) v. Hindustan Institute of Technology and Science (2024) 115 ITR 24 (SN)(Chennai)(Trib)

S. 147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Information from investigation wing-Accommodation entry-Reassessment is invalid. [S. 133(6), 148]

Shankar Logistics P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024) 115 ITR 10 (SN)(Kol)(Trib)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Investments-No failure to disclose material facts-Onus on revenue-Reassessment notice and order is quashed. [S. 143(3). 148]

Anchita Properties P. Ltd. v. ITO (2024)115 ITR 401 (Kol)(Trib)