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. 271B :Penalty-Failure to get accounts audited-Running a milk booth for distribution of products of Mother Dairy and Vegetables Pvt Ltd-Commission income-Bona fide belief-Penalty is not leviable. [S.44AB, 273B]
Tasavver Husain v. ITO (2024)113 ITR 236 (Agra)(Trib)
S. 271AAA : Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007-Undisclosed Income-Surrender of income-Specific charge-Burden of proof to establish there was undisclosed income is on Assessing Officer-Penalty is deleted.[S. 132, 132(4)]
Ajay Kumar Sood Engineers and Contractors v.Dy. CIT (2024)113 ITR 34 (SN)(Chd)(Trib)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Depreciation on Biometric devices at 60 Per Cent. Computer block-Assessing Officer allowing depreciation at 15 Per Cent-Penalty is deleted. [S. 2(11), 32]
Mahaonline Ltd. v. CIT (Appeals) (2024)113 ITR 47 (SN)(Mum)(Trib)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Notice not specifying the charge of proceedings initiated-Penalty is bad in law.[S. 274]
India Flysafe Aviation Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2024)113 ITR 431 (Delhi)(Trib)
S. 270A:Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income-Mens rea must be present-Mere additions penalty cannot be imposed. [S. 40A(3), 270A(9)(d), 270AA
Punam Kanwar Bhati v. ITO (2024)113 ITR 750/229 TTJ 518/237 DTR 297 (Jodhpur) (Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Death of assessee-Commissioner was intimated of death of assessee-Order passed in the name of dead person-Order is bad in law-Additional ground is admitted.[S. 254(1)]
Sangeeta Saini (Smt.) v. ITO (2024)113 ITR 52 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Business promotion expenses-Freebies-Change of opinion–Cannot revise the order where the Assessing Officer has conducted enquiry and allowed expenses. [S. 37(1)]
HBC Lifesciences P. Ltd. v. PCIT (2024)113 ITR 65 (SN)(Ahd)(Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Income from other sources-Share valuation-Issue of right shares-Deeming provision-Revision on ground unsecured loans not included in valuation-Revision order is set aside. [S 56(2)(viib, R.11UA)
Tiki Tar Industries Baroda Ltd. v. PCIT (2024)113 ITR 388 /228 TTJ 227/235 DTR 49 (Ahd)(Trib)
S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Delay of three to five years-Condoned-Failure to deduct tax at source-Matter is remanded to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh consideration as per law. [S. 194C]
Chief Officer, Town Municipal Council, Malebennuru v. ITO (TDS) (2024)113 ITR 56 (SN) (Bang) (Trib)
S. 250: Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Unexplained money-Commissioner (Appeals)-Natural justice-Remand report not received-Commissioner (Appeals) ought to have waited for remand report and taken steps to expedite submission-Order of Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and matter remanded to Assessing Officer. [S.69A, R.46A(1)]
Madan Lal Sharma v. ITO (2024)113 ITR 42 (SN)(Jaipur)(Trib)