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. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Period of six years in respect of which returns to be filed by third-party Assessee — Commences from date materials forwarded to Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over third-party assessee. [S. 132]

CIT v. Jasjit Singh (2023) 458 ITR 437 /295 Taxman 612/ 334 ITR 937 (SC) CIT v. R.L.Allied Industries (2023) 458 ITR 437 /295 Taxman 612 (SC) CIT v. Raunak Infrastructure Ltd (2023) 458 ITR 437 /295 Taxman 612 (SC) /CIT v. Bhupender Pal Singh Sarna 2023) 458 ITR 437 /295 Taxman 612/ 334 ITR 937 (SC) Editorial : Decision in, CIT v. Jasjit Singh (2023) 155 taxmann.com 154 (Delhi)(HC) affirmed. also refer, SSP Aviation Ltd v. Dy.CIT (2012) 346 ITR 177 (Delhi)(HC)/Review petition dismissed ,CIT v. Jasjit Singh (2025) 476 ITR 157 /304 Taxman 602 (SC)

S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Delay in filing-Writ-Alternative remedy-Order of High Court is affirmed. [S. 132, Art. 136]

Rajendra Kumar Sharma v. ITO (2023) 295 Taxman 215 /(2024) 460 ITR 157(SC) Editorial: Rajendra Kumar Sharma v. ITO (2023) 155 taxmann.com 232(2024) 460 ITR 155 (All)(HC)

S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Unexplained expenditure-Addition based on material seized-Order of High Court affirmed-SLP is dismissed.[s. 69C, Art. 136]

Nilambur Traders v. CIT (2023) 295 Taxman 219 /(2024) 460 ITR 3(SC) Editorial: Nilambur Traders v. CIT(2022)447 ITR 714/ (2023) 155 taxmann.com 194 (Ker)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Non-abated assessment-No incriminating material is found-Order of Tribunal is affirmed. [S. 132,260A]

PCIT v. LKG Builders (P) Ltd (2023) 154 Taxman.com 188 (Delhi) (HC) Editorial: PCIT (Central) v. King Buildcon (P.) Ltd. (2023) 295 Taxman 413 (SC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Assessment attained finality-No incriminating material is found-Order of Tribunal is affirmed. [S. 68, 132,260A]

ACIT v. Saluja Construction Co. Ltd. (2023) 295 Taxman 529 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search or requisition-Completed assessment/unabated assessment-No incriminating material is found-Deletion of addition by the Tribunal is affirmed. [S. 132]

PCIT (Central) v. Birju Chhotalal Shah (2023) 295 Taxman 357 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Industrial undertakings-Original assessment completed-No incriminating material was found-Disallowance of deduction under section 80IA is not valid. [S. 80IA(4), 132, 260A]

PCIT v. Backbone Projects Ltd. (2023) 457 ITR 50 /295 Taxman 54 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Non-abated assessment-No incriminating material is found-Order of High Court is affirmed-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 132, Art. 136]

PCIT (Central) v. King Buildcon (P.) Ltd. (2023) 295 Taxman 413 (SC) Editorial : PCIT v. LKG Builders (P) Ltd (2023) 154 Taxman.com 188 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 153 : Assessment-Reassessment-Limitation-International Transactions — Arm’s Length Price-Direction of DRP-Order giving effect to the order of the Tribunal-Section 144C does not exclude Section 153-Assessment order is barred by limitation — Returns of income filed to be accepted-Interpretation of taxing statutes — Section and sub-section to be read as whole with connected provisions to decipher meaning and intentions. [S. 92CA, 144C(13), 153(3), 153B, Art. 226]

Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd. v. ACIT (IT) (2023) 457 ITR 161 295 Taxman 85/ 334 CTR 11 (Bom.)(HC) Shelf Drilling Offshore Resources Ltd.II v.ACIT(IT) (2023) 457 ITR 161 295 Taxman 85/ 334 CTR 11 (Bom.)(HC) Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd v ACIT (IT) (2023) 457 ITR 161 295 Taxman 85 / 334 CTR 11 (Bom.)(HC) Shelf Drilling Trident XII v. ACIT v. (IT) (2023) 457 ITR 161 295 Taxman 85 /334 CTR 11 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-Non application of mind-Within three years-Sanction is granted by PCIT-Notice and order is bad in law-Issue of digital signature left open. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 149(1)(a), 149(1)(b), Art. 226]

Kartik Sureshchandra Gandhi v. ACIT (2023) 295 Taxman 442 (Bom.)(HC)