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. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Industrial undertakings-Road infrastructure development-High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 80IA, Art. 136]

PCIT (Central) v. MBL Infrastructure Ltd. (2023) 295 Taxman 586/(2024) 461 ITR 150 (SC) Editorial : PCIT (Central) v. MBL Infrastructure Ltd. (2023) 155 taxmann.com 656 /(2024) 461 ITR 148(Cal)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Bogus purchases-Order of High Court affirming the order of Tribunal is affirmed-SLP dismissed.[S. 69A,Art. 136]

PCIT v. Pramod Kumar Tekriwal (2023) 295 Taxman 411 (SC) Editorial: PCIT v.. Pramod Kumar Tekriwal (2023) 153 taxmann.com 761 (Cal)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-disallowance of Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT)-Provision in respect of slow moving and obsolete inventories-Issue not raised in the show cause notice-High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 40A(2), Art. 136]

PCIT v. Universal Music India (P.) Ltd. (2023) 295 Taxman 232 (SC) Editorial: PCIT v. Universal Music India (P.) Ltd(2023) 155 taxmann.com 230 (Bom)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Deemed dividend-Unsecured loan from its group companies-Delay of 470 days-SLP dismissed on ground of delay as well as on merits. [S. 2(22)(e), Art.136]

PCIT, Central v. Suprabha Industries Ltd. (2023) 295 Taxman 408 (SC) Editorial: SLP dismissed, PCIT, Central v. Suprabha Industries Ltd. (2022) 286 Taxman 156 (Cal)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Procedure to be adopted by High Court — Court must formulate question and admit appeal-Hear parties and dispose of appeal-High Court admitting appeal without formulating substantial question of law and hearing appeal on merits and reserving judgment — Question of law thereafter framed and appeal allowed — Procedure not in consonance with law-Judgment was set aside and matter is remanded to High Court for reconsideration of appeal. [S. 260A(7), Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.100, O. XLII, R. 1]

Bikram Singh v. P CIT (2023) 458 ITR 684 /295 Taxman 399 /334 ITR 473 (SC) Editorial: PCIT v. Bikram Singh (2017) 399 ITR 407 (Delhi)(HC), is set aside and matter remanded.

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Value of any benefit or perquisites-Converted in to money or not-Borrowed term loans and working capital loans from bank-One time settlement (OTS)-Principal value of loan-Order of Tribunal dismissing the miscellaneous application is set aside-Directed the Tribunal to reconsider the application-Writ petition-Discretion of the Court. [S.4, 28(iv), Art. 226]

I.G. Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (2023) 295 Taxman 569 /(2024) 470 ITR 513 (Karn)(HC)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Dismissal of appeal-Non appearance-Failure to appear on the appointed date, failure to make arrangement to represent her before Tribunal by an authorised representative and also failed to seek another date of hearing-Order of High Court is set aside-Matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A).[S. 54F, Art. 136]

Shobha Lakshman (Smt) v. CIT (Appeals) (2023) 295 Taxman 237 (SC) Editorial : Shobha Lakshman (Smt.) v. CIT (2019) 264 Taxman 198 / 311 CTR 496 / 183 DTR 213 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 245H : Settlement Commission-Power-Grant immunity from prosecution and penalty-Order of High Court remanding the matter to Settlement Commission to determine fresh, the question as to immunity from levy of penalty and prosecution is set aside. [S. 245C, 245D, 271(1))(c), Art. 136]

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2023) 458 ITR 113 /295 Taxman 588 / 334 CTR 729 (SC) Editorial: ING Vysya Bank Ltd v.CIT (2013) Taxman 115 (Karn)(HC)(SJ), CIT v. Vysya Bank Ltd (2010) 194 Taxman 533/(2012) 344 ITR 658 (Karn)(HC)

S. 245 : Refunds-Set off of refunds against tax remaining payable-Recovery of tax-Must be given information regarding proposed adjustment-Strictures-For not obeying and considering the judgments of the Supreme Court, as well as the provisions of sections 220(6) and 245 of the Act and the circulars of the Department Cost of Rs 50000 was imposed on the Assessing Officer to be deposited with the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority-High Court order imposing cost of Rs 50000 is set aside. [S. 220(6), 222, 223, 246A, Customs Act, 1962 S. 129(e), 235(f), Art. 14, 19, 265]

ACIT v. Rajendra Kumar (2023) 295 Taxman 407 /334 CTR 343 (SC) Editorial: Rajendra Kumar v. ACIT (2022) 287 Taxman 625/ 445 ITR 622 //327 CTR 116/ 215 DTR 1 (Raj)(HC)

S. 237 : Refunds-Directed to refund verified amount along with interest and balance refund amount the Revenue is directed to locate the file and release the amount based on indemnity bond furnished by the assessee. [Art. 226]

Nokia Corporation v. Dy. CIT (2023) 295 Taxman 267 (Delhi)(HC)