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. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Assessment-Limitation-Order passed beyond one month of directions of DRP under S. 144C(13)-The assessment order was barred by limitation.[S. 143(3), 144C(13), Art. 226]

Taeyang Metal India (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024) 338 CTR 161/ 160 taxmann.com 536 (Mad) (HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Opportunity of hearing-Principle of natural justice-Opportunity of personal hearing was not given-Writ petition is dismissed. [Art. 226]

Wadakkancherry Service CoOperative Bank Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 338 CTR 752 (Ker) (HC) Editorial :Order of single judge is set aside, Wadakkancherry Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v ITO (2024) 338 CTR 750 (Ker) (HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Opportunity of hearing-Principle of natural justice-Opportunity of personal hearing was not given-Order of single judge rejecting the petition is quashed and set aside. [Art. 226]

Wadakkancherry Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v ITO (2024) 338 CTR 750 (Ker) (HC) Editorial :Order of single judge is set aside, Wadakkancherry Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v ITO (2024) 338 CTR 750 (Ker) (HC)

S. 143(3): Assessment-Transfer of case-Order passed by non-jurisdictional AO after transfer of case-Transfer of the PAN was only a consequential proceeding to the transfer of jurisdiction-Order is quashed and set aside by the Tribunal is affirmed. [S. 127, 260A]

PCIT v. Ojasvi Motor Finance (P) Ltd. (2024) 338 CTR 964/ 163 taxmann.com 80 (Cal) (HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Remand-Appellate Tribunal-Order passed by AO beyond the directions of Tribunal-Order giving effect is quashed.-Change of opinion is not permissible – Entitle to refund with interest -Unexplained money – S. 115BBC(1) is not applicable to donations received as offerings from devotees -Strictures- Court also observed that “ For determining the taxes due the Assessing Officer should avoid bringing far -fetched and ideas . Without understanding the basic philosophy of income -tax , provisions are referred to so that any assessee can be taxed at any cost which is not fair or judicious approach to deal with the subjects of the State” [S. S. 11,12A, 44AB 69A, 115BBC(1), 254(1),263 , Form No 10B, Art.226 ]

Ayyappa Seva Samgham Bombay v. DCIT (2024) 338 CTR 632 / 161 taxmann.com 439// 467 ITR 672 (Bom) (HC)

S. 132A : Powers-Requisition of books of account-Cash seized by Police-S. 132A does not empower the Department to requisition a Court to deliver any seized assets, and the provision is referable only to an officer or authority-Order passed by the Magistrate is quashed-Asst.Director with whom the amounts were entrusted to return the amount released-The petitioner is directed to file the return disclosing the amount and Revenue is directed to finalise the assessment in accordance with law. [S. 132, 147, 148]

R. Ravirajan v. State of Kerala (2024) 338 CTR 684 (Ker)(HC) Vijay Bharti v.UOI (2024) 338 CTR 684 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Voluntary filing of return-Waiver or reduction-Interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act [S. 119(2)(a),139, Form 15H, Art. 226]

Baso Devi v. CBDT (2024) 338 CTR 105 / 161 taxmann.com 17 (P&H) (HC)

S. 72 : Carry forward and set off of business losses-Carry forward and set off losses-Change in share holdings-Companies which public are not substantial interested-Tribunal was justified in directing the AO to expunge the concluding remark brought forward loss is not allowed to be carry forward-Unabsorbed depreciation and capital losses do not fall within the scope and ambit of S. 79 [S.32(2), 79, 254(1), 260A, 1922 ITACT, S. 24(2), 24(3)]

PCIT v. Burda Druck India (P) Ltd [2023] 157 taxmann.com 563/(2024) 338 CTR 627 (Delhi)(HC)

S.43B: Deductions on actual payment-Interest paid to financial institutions-Reassessment-Claim for deduction not made earlier-No original assessment-Assessment order pursuant to original and revised return-Claim made during assessment proceedings-Allowable as deduction. [S.43B, 139(5), 147(b), 260A]

KHR Hospitality India Ltd. v. CIT (2024) 338 CTR 761 (Cal) (HC)

S. 40(a)(ii) : Amounts not deductible-Rates or tax-Education cess-Not allowable as business expenditure. [S. 37(1)]

JCIT v. Sesa Goa Ltd (2024) 338 CTR 377/161 taxmann.com 806 (SC) Editorial : Sesa Goa Ltd. v. Jt. CIT (2020) 316 CTR 446/ 193 DTR 41 (Bom)(HC), is set aside.