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. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Seized documents relating to cash payments for land purchase pertaining to earlier year-No incriminating material having bearing on income of relevant assessment years-Notice and proceedings held invalid and quashed.[S.132A, 153A, Art. 226]

Neeraj Bharadwaj v. ACIT (2025) 481 ITR 77/ 346 ITR 31 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 153 : Assessment-Limitation-Proceedings under s. 144C-Whether time consumed in DRP procedure is to be included within limitation prescribed under S. 153-Divergent judicial views-Issue relating to applicability of twelve-month limitation under S. 153(3) even in DRP cases and determination of maximum permissible period for completion of assessment referred to Larger Bench. [S. 144C, 153(3)]

ACIT v. Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd. (2025) 177 taxmann.com 262 / 346 CTR 137 / 253 DTR 41 (SC).

S. 149 : Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Finding or direction in appeal-S. 150 cannot be invoked to revive time-barred reassessment proceedings-Notice issued beyond limitation invalid. [S. 148, 148A(d), 150, Art. 226]

ADM Agro Industries (P) Ltd. v. ACI (2025) 346 CTR 55 / 252 DTR 383 (Delhi)(HC

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Return-Condonation of delay-Belated filing of Form 10-IC-Genuine hardship-Filing of Form 10-IC prior to filing of return not mandatory-Delay is to be condoned where substantial justice warrants relief.[S. 115BAA, 119(2)(b), Art. 226]

Cell Com Teleservices (P) Ltd. v. UOI (2025) 176 taxmann.com 712 / 346 CTR 1 / 252 DTR 353 (All)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-MAP settlement under India-USA DTAA applicable only to transactions covered under MAP-ALP of non-US transactions cannot be determined on basis of MAP framework-ALP to be independently determined under Act and Rules-DTAA-India-USA [S.92CA, R.10B, Art. 27]

Aon Consulting (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 171 taxmann.com 336 / 346 CTR 121 / 252 DTR 476 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 56 : Income from other sources-Issue of shares at premium-Valuation of unquoted shares-DCF method-FMV determined on basis of expert valuation report cannot be rejected merely due to general disclaimers-Valuation under DCF method permissible under Rule 11UA-Assessee’s substantiated valuation to be accepted-Order of Tribunal affirmed. [S. 56(2)(viib), R. 11UA]

PCIT v. A.H. Multisoft (P) Ltd. (2025) 305 Taxman 347 / 346 CTR 233 / 252 DTR 431 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Short deduction-Disallowance cannot be made for short deduction of tax at source. [S. 194C, 194J]

CIT (IT) v. Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. (2025) 176 taxmann.com 482 / 346 CTR 109 / 252 DTR 305 (Uttarakhand)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Bad debt-Advances given in the course of business written off-Genuineness of advances not doubted-Books audited by statutory auditors-Write-off allowable as deduction-Order of Tribunal affirmed. [S. 28(i), 36(1)(vii), 260A]

PCIT v. Watson Pharma (P) Ltd. (2025) 173 taxmann.com 957 /346 CTR 82 / 249 DTR 25 (Bom)(HC)

S. 10B : Export oriented undertakings-Site transfer income-Derived from-Appellate Tribunal-Duties-Tribunal had not given any reasons as to how ‘Site Transfer Income’ constituted income derived from business of undertaking, matter was remanded back to Tribunal for deciding ground of deduction under section 10B qua ‘Site Transfer Income’. [S. 254(1)]

PCIT v. Watson Pharma (P) Ltd. (2025) 173 taxmann.com 957/346 CTR 82 / 249 DTR 25 (Bom)(HC)

S. 40A(3) : Expenses or payments not deductible – Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits – Cash payment exceeding prescribed limit – Purchase of land – Amount not claimed as expenditure – No disallowance permissible – Addition deleted – Stamp duty value difference is less than 10 % – Amendment made in section 50C(1) of the Act by inserting third proviso by Finance Act, 2018, with effect from April 01, 2018 is curative and retrospective- Disallowance deleted . [S. 40(a)(ia),43CA, 50C ]

Shri Ganesh Builders Ltd. v. DCIT (Nag.)(Trib) www.itatonline.org