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. 279 : Offences and prosecutions-Sanction-Chief Commissioner-Tax deduction at source-Compounding application-Application was filed beyond twelve months-Rejection of application was set aside by High Court-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 200, 276B, 278B, 279(2), Art. 136]

ITO v. Footcandles Film (P.) Ltd. (2023) 295 Taxman 410/(2024) 460 ITR 671 (SC) Editorial : ITO v. Footcandles Film (P.) Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 402 /146 taxmann.com 304 / 333 CTR 612(Bom)(HC)

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-Failure to pay self assessment tax-Criminal complaint is filed before the Magistrate Court-Petition filed before the High Court to quash the proceedings is dismissed. [S. 139(1), 139(4), 140A,,276C, 278E,Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S. 482]

D. M. Kathir Anand v. N.S. Phanidharan (2023) 154 taxmann.com 52 (Mad)(HC) Editorial : Notice is issued in SLP filed by the assessee, D.M. Kathir Anand v. N.S. Phanidharan (2023) 295 Taxman 234 (SC)

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-Failure to pay self assessment tax-Criminal complaint is filed before the Magistrate Court-Petition filed before the High Court to quash the proceedings is dismissed-Notice is issued in SLP filed by the assessee. [S. 139(1), 139(4), 140A,,276C, 278E,Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S. 482]

D.M. Kathir Anand v. N.S. Phanidharan (2023) 295 Taxman 234 (SC) Editorial: D.M. Kathir Anand v. N.S. Phanidharan (2023) (2023) 154 taxmann.com 52 (Mad)(HC)

S. 271D : Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Transfer of money through journal entries-No penalty is leviable-Appeal of Revenue dismissed as infructuous. [S. 269SS, Art. 136]

CIT (Central) v. C. Swapna (2023) 295 Taxman 4/ 335 CTR 1015 (SC) Editorial : Refer, CIT v. C.Swapna (AP)(HC), (ITA No. 123 of 2015 dt. 6-8-2015)

S. 271D : Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Acceptance of loans and deposits-Otherwise than by account payee cheque or account payee bank draft-Reasonable cause-Order of High Court deleting the penalty is affirmed. [S. 269SS, 273B]

CIT v. Sahara India Financial Corp. Ltd. (2023) 456 ITR 788 / 295 Taxman 2/(2024) 337 CTR 378 (SC) Editorial: Order of Delhi High Court is affirmed, CIT v. Sahara India Financial Corp. Ltd (2012) 26 taxmann.com 269 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 268A : Appeal-Instructions-Monetary limits-Applicable to revision order passed under section 263 of the Act-Appeal dismissed due to low tax effect. [S. 263, 260A]

PCIT v. Nalini Surrendrabhai Patel (2023) 458 ITR 540 / 295 Taxman 187 / 335 CTR 1088(Guj.)(HC)

S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Mistakenly filed details of the Assessement year 2014-15 instead of Assessment year 2013-14-Rejection of revision application is not justified-Matter remanded to the Commissioner for de novo con sideration. [S. 143(1), 154, Art. 226]

Diwaker Tripathi v. PCIT (2023) 295 Taxman 532/ (2024) 466 ITR 371(Bom.)(HC)

S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Undisclosed income — Not maintaining the books of account-Contract works and other sources-Tax deduction at source-Form No 26AS showing the additional income-Payee confirming the payments-8% gross profit is estimated including the undisclosed income-Rejection of revision order is affirmed by High Court. [S. 133(6), 143(3), Form No. 26AS, Art. 226]

Amresh Kumar v. PCIT (2023)459 ITR 356 /154 taxmann.com 221 (Jharkhand)(HC) Editorial: SLP dismissed, Amresh Kumar v. PCIT (2023)459 ITR 364 / 295 Taxman 1 (SC)

S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Undisclosed income — Not maintaining the books of account-Contract works and other sources-Tax deduction at source-Form No 26AS showing the additional income-Payee confirming the payments-8% gross profit is estimated including the undisclosed income-Rejection of revision order is affirmed by High Court-SLP is dismissed. [S. 133(6),143(3), Form No. 26AS, Art. 136]

Amresh Kumar v. PCIT (2023)459 ITR 364 / 295 Taxman 1 (SC) Editorial: Amresh Kumar v. PCIT (2023) 154 taxmann.com 221 (Jharkhand)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Matter in issue before Commissioner which was sought to be brought to rest by opting for benefit of Scheme was in context of same-Revision proceeding is quashed. [S. 143(3),147, Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, S. 4] C

Amitkumar Chandulal Rajani v. PCIT (2023) 295 Taxman 163/(2024) 460 ITR 241/336 CTR 353 (Guj.)(HC)