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. 260A : Appeal – High Court -Territorial jurisdiction —The High Court having jurisdiction over the Assessing Officer who passed assessment order – Appeals against orders of Appellate Tribunal lie before High Court within whose jurisdiction assessing officer who passed assessment order situated. [ 116, 120, 124, 127, 252, 255, 260A, 269]

CIT v. Balak Capital Pvt. Ltd (2022) 449 ITR 394 / 220 DTR 303 /(2023 ) 330 ITR 111 / 291 Taxman 198( SC) MANU/SCOR/114426/2022( SC) MANU/SCOR/114426/2022 Editorial: Decision in CIT v. Balak Capital Pvt. Ltd ( 2017) 391 ITR 112 ( P& H)( HC), affirmed.

S. 201 : Deduction at source – Failure to deduct or pay – Leave travel concession — Estimate of income – Assessee in default Public sector Bank — Employees travelling not only to domestic destination but to foreign countries – Not taking shortest possible route — Employees not entitled to exemption — Leave travel concession reimbursed without deduction of tax at source —Assessee could not claim ignorance about travel plans of employees- Complete facts available- Not a bona fide mistake-Liable to pay interest . [ S. 10(5), 192(1) ,201(1), ITR . 2B]

State Bank of India v . CIT (2022)449 ITR 192 / 329 CTR 449 / 144 taxmann.com 131 (SC) Editorial : State Bank of India v CIT (ITA No. 5 of 2020 dt 13 -1 -2020( Delhi)( HC ) , affirmed .

S. 139 : Return of Income – Income tax returns do not necessarily furnish an accurate guide of the real income- Particularly, when parties are engaged in a matrimonial conflict- High Court was not justified in setting aside the order of the Family Court . [ Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 , S. 125 ]

Kiran Tomar & Ors v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022) SCC Online SC 539

S. 220 : Collection and recovery – Assessee deemed in default – Interest mandatory — Delay in payment of tax — Waiver — No genuine hardship- Raising dispute before Authority not ground for waiver of interest — Dispute pending resolved under mutual agreement procedure – Order of Commissioner refusing to waive interest is justified. [ S. 220(2), 220(2A) ]

Pioneer Overseas Corporation USA (India Branch) v. CIT(IT) (2022)449 ITR 186 / 329 CTR 686 / 220 DTR 39 / 145 taxmann.com 475/(2023) 290 Taxman 375 (SC) Editorial: Decision affirmed , Pioneer Overseas Corporation USA (India Branch) v. CIT(IT) ( 2017) 248 Taxman 186 ( Delhi)( HC)

S. 142(2A): Inquiry before assessment– Special audit– Reference to Special Audit – Without opportunity of being heard – Illegal – No extension of time for assessment – Additional ground – Assessment order is barred by limitation. [ S. 143(3), 153 , 254(1) ]

Rajiv Kumar v. ACIT (2023) 146 taxmann.com 115 (Chd)(Trib) www.itatonline .org

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-Tribunal quashing the order on ground of limitation-Criminal prosecution initiated against petitioner for committing offences under sections 276CC and 276 could not be quashed. [S. 139, 148, 153A, 276C, 278E]

S. J. Surya v. Dy. CIT (2022) 288 Taxman 621 / 214 DTR 361/ (2023) 333 CTR 493 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-Survey-Delay of several months-Launching of complaint is justified-Petition to quash the proceedings dismissed. [S. 133A, 139, 148, 271(1)(c), 276(1), 277]

Dharampal R. Pandia v. ACIT (2022) 288 Taxman 177 /(2023) 335 CTR 787 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Order of CIT(A)) was set aside by the Tribunal-Prosecution launched on alleged failure to comply demand notice will not survive-Criminal petition was allowed. [S. 256, 276((2), 278E]

A. Latha v. Dy. CIT (2022) 288 Taxman 565 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-Not managing director-Not in charge of day to day activities of the company-No error was committed by Trial Court in discharging assessee-Revision petition of Revenue was dismissed. [S. 2(35)(b)]

ITD v. Jenious Clothing (P) Ltd. (2022) 288 Taxman 521 (Karn.)(HC).Editorial: Notice issued in SLP filed by Revenue ,ITD v. Jenious Clothing (P) Ltd (2023) 290 Taxman 101 ( SC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Disallowance of claim. [S. 45, 94, 260A]

PCIT v. Harish Kumar HUF (2022) 288 Taxman 316 / 219 DTR 62 / 329 CTR 781 /(2023)455 ITR 350(Delhi)(HC)