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. 12A : Registration-Trust or institution–Service of show cause notice under S. 12A(1)(ac) (iii) by putting on e-portal only-Notice not served on the registered email id of the assessee as per the provisions of S. 282 of the Act-Rejecting of application is not valid-Application filed in Form No 10B cannot be sustained-Application is restored back to CIT(E ) to decide on merits. [S. 12A(1)(ac)(iii), 282, Form No 10AB]
Shamshan Sewa Samiti v. CIT (2024) 220 TTJ 113 (UO) (Amritsar ) (Trib) Shri Shri Maa Sundeshan Ji Mahraj Shri Hari Darbar Society v.CIT (2024) 220 TTJ 113 (UO) (Amritsar ) (Trib)
S. 10(10AA) : Leave salary-Super annuation benefits-Employee of the Central Government or State Government-Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB )-Transferred to power companies-Grand-fathering-Assessees have to be treated as employees of a State Government and eligible for S.. 10(10A) and 10(10AA) benefits.. [S.10A, Electricity Act, 2003, 131, 133 (2)]
Mohan Baliramji Thakre. v ITO (2024) 229 TTJ 678 / 237 DTR 233 / 38 NYPTTJ 508 / 166 taxmann.com 158 (SMC)) (Nagpur)(Trib)
S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Payment for supply of software-The payments received by the assessee is for the supply of software do not fall within the scope of art. 12(3) of the India-China DTAA. In the absence of PE the income is not taxable in India. DTAA-India-China.[Art. 12(3)]
SAIC Motor Overseas Intelligent Mobility Technology Co. Ltd. v. ACIT (IT) (2024) 229 TTJ 801 / 239 DTR 42 / 38 NYPTTJ 242 / 159 taxmann.com 779 (Delhi)(Trib)
S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Capital or revenue-Interest subsidy-Technology upgradation fund scheme-Ground raised first time-Issue is restored to the AO for fresh adjudication as per provisions of law [S. 2(24)(xviii)]
Chirpal Industries Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024) 229 TTJ 87 (UO) (Ahd.)(Trib.)
S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Accrual of income-Commission-Service charges receivable from State Government-Auditors report stating under reporting of income-Liable to be taxed on accrual basis. [S. 5, 145]
ACIT v. Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit (2023) 37 NYPTTJ 962 / (2024) 229 TTJ 415 / 241 DTR 233 (Raipur)(Trib)
S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record –Territorial jurisdiction- Rectification application filed by the Revenue to quash the order of Mumbai Tribunal on the ground that the Mumbai Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and the appeal should have been filed before the ITAT at Pune is dismissed . [ S. 12A , 127 ]
Dy.CIT v. Heart Foundation of India ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org
S. 272A : Penalty-Failure to answer questions-Sign statements-Furnish information-No notice were received-Sufficient and reasonable cause for non-attendance-Without providing sufficient time to reply cannot be treated as non-compliance u/s.272A(1)(d)-Penalty is deleted. [S. 272A(1)(d)]
Dhanraj Ramchandra Chandwani v. ITO (Pune)(Trib) (UR)
S. 272A : Penalty-Failure to answer questions-Sign statements-Furnish information-The penalty cannot be imposed when AO expresses satisfaction with the assessee’s compliance.[S. 272A(1)(d)]
Shilpa Shetty Kundra v. DCIT [2025] 173 taxmann.com 342 (Mum) (Trib.)
S. 271AAB:Peanlty-Search initiated on or after Ist day of July 2012-
Assessment completed u/s. 143(3)-Addition made-Reopening u/s. 147-Again additions made-Two penalty proceedings for both addition-Merging of penalty is not valid-Not specifying the charge-Barred by limitation-Penalty order is quashed. [S. 274,275].
Panda Infratech Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2025) 233 TTJ 356 (Cuttack) (Trib)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-No specific limb in penalty notice-Penalty order is set aside.[S. 274]
Sudesh Gupta v. ACIT. [2025] 121 ITR 1/ 210 ITD 436 (Delhi) (Trib)