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. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment –On money – Survey – Income voluntarily offered- Deletion of penalty is held to be justified [ S. 131(IA), 133A]

PCIT v. Shreedhar Associates (2022) 440 ITR 547 (Guj) ( HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Matter to be remanded to Commissioner where evidence was not considered by him- Monetary limits – Appeal was dismissed .[ S. 80IB, 153A, 254(1), 260A]

PCIT v. Shalimar Pellet Feeds Ltd. (2022) 440 ITR 530 / 216 DTR 211/ 328 CTR 840(Cal) (HC)

S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record – Delay of 1924 days ( Eight years) -Condonation of delay was dismissed . [. 260A ]

South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 440 ITR 568 (Chhattisgarh) (HC)

S. 246A : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Writ against assessment order – Alternative remedy – Writ petition was dismissed .[S. 143(3), 248, Art, 226 ]

Sree Karumariamman Granites v. ACIT (2022) 440 ITR 537/ 209 DTR 283/ 324 CTR 418 (Mad) (HC)

S.234E: Fee – Default in furnishing the statements – Provision for levy of late fee for delay in filing — Valid — Intimation calling for payment of late fee for delaying filing of return — Not sustainable for periods prior to June 1, 2015 [S. 200A, Art , 226 ]

Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. UOI (2022) 440 ITR 26/210 DTR 145/ 324 CTR 616 (Ker) (HC)

S. 151 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Sanction for issue of notice – Recording of separate reasons not necessary – Reassessment notice is held to be valid . [ S. 147, 148 , Art , 226 ]

Premlata Soni ( Smt.) v . NEAC (2022) 440 ITR 578 (MP) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years- Where the necessary details were disclosed, reopening is not valid. [ S. 148, Art , 226 ]

JRS Pharma and Gujarat Microwax Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2022) 440 ITR 557 (Guj) ( HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years- Where the necessary details were disclosed, reopening is not valid. [ S. 54, 148, Art , 226 ]

Bankim Bhagwanji Chaauhan v. ITO (2022) 440 ITR 485 (Guj) ( HC) Bankim Bhagwanji Chaauhan v. ITO (2022) 440 ITR 485 (Guj) ( HC)

S.147: Reassessment – Two assessment years reopened – One with in four years – One after the expiry of four years – Condition Precedent — Primary facts necessary for assessment fully and truly disclosed — AO had applied his mind – Not open for the AO to reopen assessment based on very same material and to take a different view – Notices for reopening on change of opinion – Invalid [S. 148, Art , 226 ]

Rich Feel Health and Beauty Private Limited v. ITO (2022) 440 ITR 41/ 284 Taxman 286 (Bom) ( HC)/Editorial: SLP of Revenue dismissed , ITO v. Rich Feel Health & Beauty (P.) Ltd (2023) 291 Taxman 203 (SC)

S.147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Condition Precedent — Notice not specifying failure to disclose any material facts truly and fully by assessee — Notice and subsequent order invalid. [S. 148, Art , 226 ]

Coca-Cola India P. Ltd. v. DCIT (2022) 440 ITR 20 (Bom) ( HC)