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. 143(2) : Assessment-Notice-Contempt-Not following the judgement of High court order-Liable for contempt-Notice was quashed on ground of jurisdiction as well as consequential orders were also directed to be set aside-Assessing Officer deliberately and intentionally Assessing Officer permitted to continue, outstanding amount operative on web portal till seven months-Reputation of assessee-Assessing Officer is held of Contempt of Court-Directed to pay a fine of Rs 25000 along with simple imprisonment for a period of one week, in case of default one day’s further simple imprisonment. [S. 124, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, S. 12]

Prashant Chandra v. Harish Gidwani Dy. CIT (2022) 145 taxmann.com 496 /(2023) 330 CTR 404/221 DTR 289 (All)(HC)

S. 127 : Transfer of case-Proceedings for assessment is pending-At the motion stage the Court cannot pass the interim order-Pendency of writ petition will not bar for proceed with assessment proceeding.[S. 148, 148A(d), Art, 226]

Nouvelle Advisory Services (P) Ltd. v ACIT (2023) 331 CTR 239/ 223 DTR 449(Cal)(HC) Editorial : Order of single judge is modified, Nouvelle Advisory Services (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 291 Taxman 583/ 331 CTR 235/ 223 DTR 145 (Cal)(HC)

S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Instructions-Circular-Refund-Condonation of delay Belated return beyond period specified in section 139-Delay is directed to be condoned-Matter remanded. [S.119(2)(b), 139 237, 244A, Art. 226]

K.C. Antony v. PCIT (2023) 330 CTR 338/ 148 taxmann.com 28 (Ker)(HC)

S. 115J : Company-Book profit-Addition of prior period adjustments-To be included for working out book-Order of Tribunal is set aside. [S. 260A]

AP State Seeds Development Corporation v.CIT (2023) 332 CTR 118 / 224 DTR 211/148 taxmann.com 197 (Telangana)(HC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Charging substantial fees from students-Exemption cannot be denied-Order of Tribunal is affirmed.[S. 2(15), 13, 260A]

CIT v. Siksha ‘O’ Anusandhan (2023) 331 CTR 348 (Orissa) (HC)

S. 10(23C) : Educational institution-Cancellation of registration-Surplus generated by was to be ploughed back for fulfilment and attainment of educational activities-Denial of approval is not justified.[S. 10(23C(vi), 12AA(2), Art. 226]

Bosco Educational Academy (P.) Ltd. v. Chief CIT (2021) 127 taxmann.com 776 /(2023) 332 CTR 43/224 DTR 131 (Mad)(HC)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Supply of equipment-DTAA-India-Singapore-Issue settled under VSV Scheme-Appeals have became infructuous-Appeal is dismissed. [S. 92, Art. 5, Art. 136]

ADIT (IT) v. Rolls Royce Singapore (P.) Ltd (2023) 332 CTR 733/152 taxmann.com 502 (SC) Editorial : Rolls Royce Singapore (P.) Ltd v. ADIT (IT)(2011) 64 DTR 95 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 132B : Application of seized or requisitioned assets -Search and seizure —Strictures -Return of seized cash — Inordinate delay in returning seized cash —Clear case of high handedness on the part of the officers of the Revenue- Entitled to interest on amount returned .[ S. 132, Art. 226 ]

Vinoda B. Jain v .Jt. CIT (2023) 335 CTR 1079/ 156 taxmann.com 185 / (2024)462 ITR 58 (Bom)(HC)/Editorial: SLP of Revenue is dismissed , Vinoda B. Jain v.JCIT ( 2024) 462 ITR 58 ( Bom)( HC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel -Jurisdiction-Dispute Resolution Panel can give directions only in pending assessments – Interpretation of taxing statutes — Strict interpretation. [ S.92CA ,246A, Art. 226 ]

Undercarriage and Tractor Parts Pvt. Ltd. v .Dispute Resolution Panel .(2023) 335 CTR 974 /156 taxmann. com 79/ (2024)460 ITR 401 (Bom)(HC)/Editorial : SLP of revenue was dismissed , Dy. CIT v. Undercarriage and Tractor Parts Pvt. Ltd(2025) 476 ITR 3/305 Taxman 411 (SC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel -Eligible assessee — Draft assessment order — Mandatory — Even when assessment order is issued in conformity with directions from higher authority — Failure to pass draft assessment order —Final order unlawful — Demand notice and penalty proceedings invalid [ S. 143(3) 156 , 263 , 270A , Art. 226 ]

Sinogas Management Pte. Ltd. v . Dy. CIT(2023) 335 CTR 873/ / (2024)461 ITR 330 (Delhi)(HC)