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-Rectification order-Not barred by limitation-Order was passed within six months from end of month in which original order was passed-It would not be open to Assessing Officer to hold giving effect to these directions even if said directions were found to be prima facie incorrect. [S. 92C,144C(13), R. 10]

Michael Page International Recruitment (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 219 DTR 57 / 99 ITR 65 / 220 TTJ 137 / 143 taxmann.com 253 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Rectification application-Rule 13 does not permit a rectification application being entertained from a person other than assessee, Assessing Officer or DRP itself-Miscellaneous application filed by TPO before DRP for rectifying various mistakes in order of DRP would not be maintainable.[S.92C, 154, Rule 13]

Shapoorji Pallonji Bumi Armada (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 220 TTJ 951 / 139 taxmann.com 572 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Limitation-Time-limit for passing final order of assessment-One month from end of month in which directions of Dispute Resolution Panel received by Assessing Officer-Order passed beyond that date-Non est in law. [S. 92CA (3), 144C(13), 153, 153B]

Kontoor Brands India P. Ltd. v. ACIT (2022)100 ITR 73 (SN)(Bang) (Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Arm’s length price-Transfer pricing adjustment was not in accordance with the direction of the Dispute Resolution Panel-Order was quashed. [S. 144C(13)]

Trivium Esolutions Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 99 ITR 27 (SN) (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Capital gains-Non-Resident-Eligible assessee-Change Of Law-Amendment to include non-Residents as eligible assessees with effect from 1-4-2020-Pending assessments for which orders passed after 1-4-2020 is covered by amended section.[S. 45, 49]

Ravi Kumar Tirupati Parthasarathy v. Dy. CIT (2022)99 ITR 70 (SN)(Bang) (Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Draft assessment order-Assignment of finality to draft order-Order vitiated. [S. 143(3)]

YCH Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)98 ITR 467 (Chennai) (Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Order not in conformity with directions of Dispute Resolution Panel-Order bad in law and not sustainable. [S. 143(3)]

Vmware Software India P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)98 ITR 219 (Bang) (Trib)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Transfer pricing-Assessing Officer to pass final order from end of month in which direction received from Dispute Resolution Panel-Order not barred by limitation.[S. 92C, 144C(13)]

VMware Software India P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)98 ITR 219 (Bang) (Trib)

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment-Cash deposited in assessee’s Bank Account-Burden of proof on assessee that bank account not his-Matter remanded for adjudication afresh. [S. 143(3)]

ACIT v. Kamlesh Kumar Sahu (2022) 96 ITR 53 (SN) (Jabalpur) (Trib)

S. 144 : Best judgement assessment-Income from undisclosed sources-Estimation of profits-Profits declared at 14.80%-Amount deposited in account much higher than turnover-Assessing officer applied net profit at 8%-Additions justified-Interest income not disclosed-Addition is justified. [S. 69, Form 26AS]

Mohan Chandra Mondal v. ITO (2022) 97 ITR 53 (SN) (Kol) (Trib)