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. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 707 days-Sufficient cause-Heavy workload-Lack of man power-Delay was not condoned-[S. 263, Art. 226]

CIT v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 153 taxmann.com 676 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial : Delay was condoned and the order of High Court is set aside to decide on merit, CIT (C) v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 456 ITR 773 / 294 Taxman 702 (SC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 707 days-Sufficient cause-Heavy workload-Lack of man power-Delay was condoned-Directed the High Court to decide on merits.[S. 263, Art. 136]

CIT (C) v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 456 ITR 773 / 294 Taxman 702 /(2024) 337 CTR 375(SC) Editorial : CIT v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 153 taxmann.com 676 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 1110 days-Delay was due to change in their Standing Counsel and previous counsel’s failure to inform them about appeal’s status-Matter was to be restored to High Court-Cost of Rs 5000 was imposed. [Art. 136]

DIT (IT) v. Western Union Financial Services Inc. (2023) 459 ITR 58 /294 Taxman 704 / 333 CTR 450 (SC) Editorial : DIT (IT) v. Western Union Financial Services Inc (2023) 459 ITR 56 / 153 taxmann.com 703 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 255 : Appellate Tribunal-Procedure-Functions-Transferring four appeals of assessee from Bangalore Bench to Mumbai Bench-Jurisdiction of concerned High Court would depend upon where seat of Assessing Officer was and, Assessing Officer who passed order-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [Art. 136]

PCIT v. MSPL Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 280 /294 Taxman 74 /332 CTR 606 (SC) Editorial: PCIT v. MSPL Ltd (2021) 436 ITR 199 / 127 taxmann.com 379 (Bom)(HC)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Remand proceedings-Cross examination-Revenue is directed to provide effective cross examination as per the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. [S. 250, Indian Evidence Act, 1872]

Madhu Korah v. ITD (2023) 294 Taxman 63 (Jharkhand)(HC)

S. 245HA : Settlement Commission-Abatement of proceedings-Shortfall on additional taxes and interest-Subsequently intimated-Abatement invalid. [S. 245C, 245D(2A), Art. 226]

Mahesh Gupta v. ITSC (2023) 294 Taxman 537 / 335 CTR 251/(2024)461 ITR 267 (Bom)(HC)

S. 245HA : Settlement Commission-Abatement of proceedings-Shortfall on additional taxes and interest-Refunds-Interest-Excess tax paid-If interest on excess payment made on self-assessment, same would meet requirement of section 245D(2D)-Petition is allowed and the matter is directed to be placed before the Interim Board for Settlement constituted under section 245AA for consideration. [S. 244A, 245AA, 245C,245(2D). Art. 226]

Sitadevi Satyanarayan Malpani (Mrs.) v. ITSC (2023) 459 ITR 758 /294 Taxman 205 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Rectification of order-Rectification application was filed beyond period of six months-Rejection of application is said to be valid. [S. 245D(4), 245D(6B), Art. 226]

PCIT v. Goldsukh Developers (P.) Ltd. (2023) 294 Taxman 484 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Application-Additional income disclosed-Settlement Commission accepted the additional income-High Court set aside the order-On appeal the matter was remanded back to Settlement Commission (now Interim Board) for reconsideration and re-determination of undisclosed income, after giving an opportunity to both sides. [S. 133A, 2245C, 245D(4), Art. 136]

Shree Nilkanth Developers v. PCIT (2023) 457 ITR 464 /294 Taxman 591 / 334 CTR 1 (SC) Editorial: PCIT v. Shree Nilkanth Developers(2016) 73 taxmann.com 76 (Guj)(HC)

S. 245C : Settlement Commission-Pendency of proceedings-No proceedings was pending-Petition is not maintainable.[S. 147 148, 245A, Art. 226]

Bishan Das Goyal HUF v. PCIT (2023) 294 Taxman 102 (Delhi)(HC)