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. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Global online learning platform-The receipts of the assessee do not qualify as fees for included services under art. 12(4) of India-USA tax treaty-DTAA-India-USA. [S. 144C(13), Art. 12(4)]

Coursera Inc. v. ACIT (IT) (2024) 231 TTJ 726 / 242 DTR 41 / 38 NYPTTJ 1111 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Functions as selling and purchasing agent-Because the nature of business of trading is a continuous flow of the business process, that cannot be a foundation to conclude a principal-agent relationship for the purpose of art. 5 of the DTAA-There is no PE of assessee in the form of ITPL-DTAA-India-Japan. [S. 90, Art. 5(6)]

ITOCHU Corporation v. ACIT (IT) (2024) 231 TTJ 744 / 242 DTR 57 / 38 NYPTTJ 995 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Disallowance of excess brought forward losses pursuant to MAP order-Revised computation filed-Time for filing revised return has expired-Paid additional tax along with interest-Penalty is deleted. [S. 143(2), 139(1), 139(5)]

DCIT v. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries VST Diesel Engines (P) Ltd. (2024) 230 TTJ 298 / 240 DTR 26 / 38 NYPTTJ 717/ 163 taxmann.com 189 (Bang)(Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Bogus purchase-Addition made on estimate basis-Penalty is not leviable-Omission to strike off one of the twin charges in the notice-Not invalidate penalty proceedings. [S.69C, 274]

Dinesh Somatmal Dhokar v. ITO (2024) 230 TTJ 137 / 240 DTR 111 / 38 NYPTTJ 647 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 270A:Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income-Omission to file return-Sale of property TDS deducted-Penalty is deleted. [S. 139,194IA Form No 26AS]

Parulben Vijaykumar Patel v. ITO (2024) 230 TTJ 114 /239 DTR 33 / 38 NYPTTJ 646/ 163 taxmann.com 191 (Ahd)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Non-Resident-Trading in shares-CIT has not pointed out any reason for doubting the explanation-Revision order is set aside.[S. 143(3)]

Shama Ajay Patel v. CIT (2024) 230 TTJ 33 (UO) (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Dividend-Mutual fund and Equity shares-Explanation 2 is not applicable-Revision is quashed. [S. 10(35), 115BBDA 143(3)]

Sampark Management Consultancy LLP v. PCIT (2024) 230 TTJ 735 / 241 DTR 84 / 38 NYPTTJ 365 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Unsigned assessment and non-service of order-Physical copy was signed-Up loaded unsigned copy-Revision is valid.[S. 143(3), 153C]

Ramasamy Sathyan v. ACIT (2024) 230 TTJ 889 / 240 DTR 377 /38 NYPTTJ 793 / 163 taxmann.com 519 (Chennai)(Trib)

S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Territorial jurisdiction of CIT(A)-Appeal filed before non-jurisdictional CIT(A)-Order by the CIT(A) CIT(A), Noida is set aside and the matter is remanded to the CIT(A), Ghaziabad to adjudicate the appeal afresh in accordance with law. [S. 246A]

ITO v. Shalini Gupta (2024) 230 TTJ 403 / 239 DTR 123 / 38 NYPTTJ 657 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 199 : Deduction at source-Credit for tax deducted-Salary-Matter remanded to the file of CIT(A) for verification. [S. 192, Form no 26AS]

Ajit Chandrashekar Dighe v. CIT (2024) 230 TTJ 766 / 238 DTR 30 / 38 NYPTTJ 412 / 167 taxmann.com 529 (Mum)(Trib)