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. 36(1)(viia) :Bad debt-Provision for bad and doubtful debts – Banks -Schedule bank –Average advances of rural branches – Advances outstanding as well as fresh advances are to be considered .

Canara Bank v. DCIT (2024) 204 ITD 358 ( Bang )(Trib)

S. 36(1)(vii) :Bad debt –Banks – Non -Rural branches – Amounts written off – Allowable as deduction.

Canara Bank v. DCIT (2024) 204 ITD 358 ( Bang )(Trib)

S.14A: Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income – No expenditure is incurred for earning dividend income – Disallowance is not justified . [ R. 8D ]

Canara Bank v. DCIT (2024) 204 ITD 358 ( Bang )(Trib)

S.2(14)(iii): Capital asset – Agricultural land –Sale of agricultural land – Purchaser changed the use for commercial purposes – Not assessable as capital gains . [Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands ( Amendment ) Act , 1997 ( GT & All) S.63AA,65B]

Hiten Tulshibhai Engineer v. ITO (2024) 204 ITD 98 (Ahd)( Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cash in excess of Rs.20000-Proper inquiry was conducted-Revision is held to be not valid.[S.40(a)(ia), 40A(3), R.6DD]

PCIT v. Shhukla Dairy Pvt Ltd (2023) 457 ITR 145 (Guj)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Order of assessment was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to Revenue-Revision is not valid. [S. 143(3)]

CIT (LTU). v Canara Bank (2023)457 ITR 556 (Karn)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay in filing appeal-Delay was condoned subject to payment of cost of Rs.50000-Cost was not paid-Order condoning the delay is recalled.

CIT v. Manoj Murarka (2023)457 ITR 600/ 330 CTR 613/ 156 taxmann.com 190(Cal)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Penny stock companies-Tribunal quashed the revision order and also on merits-Revenue has challenged only on the ground on merits and not against quashing the revision order-Dismissing the appeal the Court held that a piecemeal challenge of the order passed by the Tribunal on one grounds on which relief was granted to assesseee was not maintainable. [S. 10(38), 45, 68, 254(1), 263]

PCIT v. Reeta Lakhmani (2023)457 ITR 603 /291 Taxman 358 (Cal)(HC) PCIT v. Ritin Lakhmani (2023)457 ITR 603 /291 Taxman 358 (Cal)(HC) PCIT v.Jaikihan Lakhmani (2023)457 ITR 603 /291 Taxman 358 (Cal)(HC) PCIT v.Pravash Lakhmani (2023)457 ITR 603 /291 Taxman 358 (Cal)(HC) PCIT v. Rachit Lakhmani (2023)457 ITR 603 /291 Taxman 358 (Cal)(HC) PCIT v. Gopichand Lakhmani (2023)457 ITR 603 /291 Taxman 358 (Cal)(HC) PCIT v. Ravish Lakhmani (2023)457 ITR 603 /291 Taxman 358 (Cal)(HC)

S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax-Mandatory-Capital gains-Central Board Of Direct Taxes-Notification-Cannot override provisions of Statute-Or otherwise. [S. 119, 234B(2), Art. 226]

Malini Ravindran (Mrs.) v. CIT (Appeal) (2023)457 ITR 401/151 taxmann.com 102/ 335 CTR 549 (Mad)(HC)

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default-Stay-Discretion should be used in judicious manner.[S. 220(6), Art. 226]

Zoos and Parks Authority of Telangana v. CIT (E) (2023)457 ITR 560 (Telangana)(HC)