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. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment –Bogus purchases – Estimate of income -Ex -parte order – Penalty is deleted – Tribunal also observed that when the necessary facts and circumstances and material on the basis of which, the issue in the appeal has to be decided, are already on record, this Tribunal would be slow in directing such remand which may ultimately lead to multiplicity of proceedings . [ S. 250 ]

Dombivali Paper Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd v. ACIT ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Expenditure incurred for renovation of school building and payment of taxes – Allowable as application of income though the assessee is not owner of the building . [ S. 11(1)(a)

Bombay Society of the Salesian Sisters India, v. ITO ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org .

Contempt of Courts Act , 1971 .

S. 2( c )(i): Contempt of Court- Criminal contempt – For making Scandalous , unwarranted and baseless imputations against several sitting Judges of the High Court and district Courts – Court has sentenced a lawyer to six months imprisonment after holding him guilty of criminal contempt . [ S. 5 14, , 15]

Court on its own motion v. Virendra Singh , Advocate . ( Delhi)( HC) www.itatonline. Org.

S. 153C : Assessment – Income of any other person – Search – Recording of satisfaction -Additional ground – Question of law admitted – Document Identification Number / Document Number (DIN/DN) – CBDT circular -Binding on the Assessing Officer – Not mentioned in the assessment order – Order is quashed and set aside. [ S. 119, 143(3), 254(1), 292B ]

Sunderlal Bajaj HUF v. DCIT ( Delhi)( Trib) www.itatonline .org

The Prohibitions of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988

S. 24 :Notice and attachment of property involved in benami transaction- Show cause notice – Court held that the show-cause notice could not be interfered however, time to file objection/response to show-cause notice was extended by a period of two weeks. [ S.2( 9) , Art. 226 ]

Aachman Marketing (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 294 Taxman 737 (Cal.) (HC)

Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 [DTVSVA]

S.4: Filing of declaration and particulars to be furnished – Peendency of appeal – Filing of declaration- Pendency of miscellaneous application before the Appellate Tribunal- Rejection of application by the Principal Commissioner was held to be not valid – PCIT was to be directed to issue acknowledgement in Form No. 3 against application made by assessee in Form No. 1 and Form No. 2 . [ S. 2 (1)j), Income tax Act, 1961 , S. 254(1), 254(2) 264 , Art . 226 ]

Oerlikon Balzers Coating India (P.) Ltd. v. UOI (2023) 294 Taxman 5 / 333 CTR 337 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 2(9) : Benami Property transactions-Benami Transaction (Position prior to 1-11-2016)-Transaction which took place prior to 1-11-2016-Order of High Court is affirmed. [Art. 226]

ACIT v. Nutrient Marine Foods Ltd. (2023) 293 Taxman 602 (SC) Editorial : Nutrient Marine Foods Ltd v. Adjudicating Authority (2023) 152 taxmann.com 86 (Telengana)(HC)

S. 2(9): Benami Property transactions-Section 2(9) of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 being prospective in nature, it could not be applied to transaction which took place prior to 1-11-2016. [Art. 226]

Nutrient Marine Foods Ltd v. Adjudicating Authority (2023) 152 taxmann.com 86 (Telengana)(HC) Editorial : SLP of Revenue was dismissed, ACIT v. Nutrient Marine Foods Ltd. (2023) 293 Taxman 602 (SC)

S. 183 : Declaration of undisclosed income-Reassessment notice was quashed. [Income-tax Act, 1961, S. 148, Art. 226]

Kamla Chandrasingh Kabali v. ACIT (2023) 151 Taxmann.com 435 (Bom)(HC) Editorial: SLP of Revenue is dismissed, ACIT v. Kamla Chandrasingh Kabali (2023) 293 Taxman 492 (SC)

S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-High Court dismissed the petition to quash the proceedings. [S. 200, 204, 278B]

Petrus Lambertus Maria Hermans v. ACIT (TDS) (2023) 293 Taxman 176/334 CTR 933 // (2024) 460 ITR 513 (Bom.)(HC)