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. 275 : Penalty-Bar of limitation-Notice for levy of penalty must be issued before expiry of limitation-Notice was barred by limitation. [S.274, 275(1)(c)]

PCIT v. Thapar Homes Ltd.(2025) 483 ITR 248 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 275 : Penalty-Bar of limitation-Concealment-Penalty should be levied within a reasonable time-Order levying penalty eleven years after passing of assessment order and fourteen years after return-Held to be not valid. [S. 271(1)(c), 275(1)(c)] was filed Not valid-Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 275(1)(c).

PCIT v. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd (2025) 483 ITR 109 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 275 : Penalty-Bar of limitation-First appellate order was received in the financial year 2006-2007-The penalty should have been imposed within March 31, 2008 as per the proviso, especially when the order was one passed after June 1, 2003-The orders were passed on March 31, 2009 much after the limitation period-Not valid.[S.260A, 275(1)(a)]

Mahesh Kr. Agarwal @ Mahesh Agarwal v. Dy. CIT (2025) 483 ITR 57 (Pat)(HC)

S. 271E: Penalty-Repayment of loan or deposit-Book entries discharge of liabilities-Repayment of loan in cash-No evidence that loan was repaid in cash-Penalty not imposable. [S. 269SS, 269T]

Anamallais Bus Transports Pvt. Ltd v. PCIT [2024] 158 taxmann.com 245 / (2025) 483 ITR 659 (Mad)(HC)

S.271D: Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Acceptance of loan in cash in excess of specified limit-No satisfaction recorded-Order of Tribunal deleting the penalty is affirmed. [S.260A, 269SS]

PCIT v. Parivar Television Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 483 ITR 391/ 180 taxmann.com 109 ((Guj)(HC) Editorial : SLP dismissed, PCIT v. Parivar Television Pvt. Ltd ([2025] 481 ITR 14/2026) 308 Taxman 186 (SC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Difference between assessed income and returned income-Survey-Presumption not rebutted-Levy of penalty valid. [S. 133A, 260A]

Kawaljit Enterprises v. CIT (2025) 483 ITR 681 (Telengna)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c): Penalty-Concealment-Mistake in return-No intention to conceal income or furnishing inaccurate particulars thereof-Order of Tribunal deleting the penalty affirmed. [S. 139]

PCIT v. Pinstorm Technologies Pvt. Ltd [2024] 158 taxmann.com 511 / (2025) 483 ITR 591 (Bom)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Bona fide belief-Charitable trust-Registration-Deletion of penalty by the Tribunal is affirmed. [S. 12A, 260A]

CIT v. Punjab Heritage and Tourism Promotion Board (2025) 483 ITR 581 (P & H) (HC)

S. 264 :Commissioner-Revision of other orders –Rejection of application for rectification on ground that error sought to be rectified was not manifest-Commissioner had no power to revise order under section 264.[S. 143(1), 154]

Hotel Raj Laxmi v.PCIT (2025) 483 ITR 258 (Patna)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Alleged bogus purchases-Assessment had been passed after due enquiry-Revision of order not valid.[S. 143(3), 260A]

PCIT v. Ramchandra Dahyabhai Narrow Fab Pvt. Ltd.(2025) 483 ITR 722 (Guj)(HC)