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. 147 : Reassessment-No addition is made on the basis of recorded reasons-Reassessment is bad in law-The AO lacks jurisdiction to make independent addition-Limited scrutiny-Not obtaining approval for converting limited scrutiny in to complete scrutiny-Order is not valid. [S. 2(22)(e), 143(3), 148]

Pioneer Carbon Co Pvt. Ltd. Bhilai v. ITO, (2024) 111 ITR 409 (Raipur)(Trib.)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Cash credits-Accommodation entries-Objection is not disposed-Information from ADGIT Investigation (OSD)-The addition made without enquiry and without application of mind-Reassessment is quashed. [S.143(1) 148]

R. S. Darshan Singh Motor Car Finance P. Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 112 ITR 158 (Kol)(Trib.)

S. 145 : Method of accounting-Books of account-Rejection of estimation of profits-Rejection of books of account is held to be not justified. [S. 44AB, 145(3)]

Mahavir Dyeing and Printing Mills P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (2024)111 ITR 53 (SN)(Surat) (Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Not an eligible assessee-Assessment-Limitation-Assessment order is bad in law-Additional ground is allowed.[S.92CA(3A), 144C(15)(b), 153 (4) 254(1)]

Siemens Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024) 112 ITR 248 (Mum)(Trib.)

S. 132: Search and seizure-undisclosed income-bogus purchases-failure to rebut statement of the broker by documentary evidence by the Assessee, restricting addition to 12.5 percent is held to be proper [S. 132]

Akshar Shanti Realtors P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024) 111 ITR 25 (SN)(Mumbai)(Trib.) Dy.CIT v.Nilesh Shantilal Tank v. Dy. CIT (2024) 111 ITR 25 (SN)(Mumbai)(Trib.)

S. 115BBE-Tax on specified income-Determination of tax in certain cases-Unaccounted stock declared during survey-Excess stock being part of total business stock-Cannot be assessed as deemed income [S.69, 69B]

ACIT (Central) Ujjain v. Italian Edibles Pvt. Ltd (Indore)(Trib)(UR)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Selection of comparables-Persistent Loss Filter-Matter remanded-Turnover filter-Companies whose turnover in current year is more than Rs. 200 crores is to be excluded from list of comparables-Companies Lacking Segmental Information And Functionally Dissimilar with assessee cannot be taken as comparables-Interest on outstanding receivables-Matter remanded-Rate of interest charged at Libor + 300 basis points considering credit period of 90 days.[S.92B, 92CA]

Etisalat Software Solutions P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024) 111 ITR 475 (Bang)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Selection of comparables-Turnover filter-Companies having turnover exceeding two hundred crore rupees were to be rejected-Persistent losses filter-Matter remanded-Notional interest on overdue receivables-Transfer Pricing Officer to recompute adjustment only in respect of invoices overdue for more than ninety days at interest rate of six months, Libor plus three hundred and fifty basis points.[R. 10B]

Deliverhealth Solutions India P. Ltd. v Asst. Officer (2024) 111 ITR 554 (Bang)(Trib)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Specified domestic transaction-Selection of comparable-Matter remanded. [R.10B]

American Express Services India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024) 111 ITR 348/ 159 taxmann.com 1378 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 92B : Transfer pricing-International transaction-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-Corporate guarantee-International transactions-Guarantee fee at 0.5 Per Cent.is justified-Deduction of tax at source-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer. [S.92C]

Tega Industries Ltd. v. AUI (2024)111 ITR 71 (SN)(Kol)(Trib)