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. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Information from DDIT (Inv)-Accommodation entries-Bogus capital gains and losses-Penny stock scrips-Original assessment proceedings transaction was treated as bonafide-Even if it was assumed that Assessing Officer had committed a mistake, still, assessment could not have been reopened to remedy error-Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection was quashed. [S. 45, 69, 148, Art. 226]
Sunil Hanskrishna Khanna v. ACIT (2022) 139 taxmann.com 555 / 288 Taxman 46 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Business income-Unsecured non-convertible redeemable debentures was actually sale consideration received in respect of sale of flats and that had escaped assessment-Issue of debentures had been a subject of consideration of assessment proceedings-Reopening on same basis was not permissible. [S. 28(1), 148, Art. 226]
Tanna Builders Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 288 Taxman 300 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Depreciation-Straight line method-Written down value method-No failure on part of assessee to disclose facts, reopening of assessment was not justified. [S. 10A, 32, 148, Art. 226]
Sunjewels India (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 288 Taxman 562 (Bom.)(HC) Sunjewels India (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 288 Taxman 591 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Business expenditure-Reply to queries in respect of said expenses were furnished-Reassessment notice and order disposing objection was quashed. [S. 37(1), 148, Art. 226]
Rajeshwar Land Developers (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 288 Taxman 186/(2023) 450 ITR 108 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Change of opinion-Deduction allowed unit wise-Reasons for reassessment notice was the assessee should have been allowed deduction of 30 per cent and not 100 per cent-Reassessment notice and order disposal of objection was quashed. [S. 80IC, 148, Art. 226]
Pidilite Industries Ltd. v. UOI (2022) 288 Taxman 227 (Bom.)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Long term capital gains-Bogus claim-Dead person-Reopening of assessment for same reason-Matter was remanded back to Assessing Officer to verify reasons for reopening and only if different reason was given on earlier occasion, Assessing Officer could proceed to finalize impugned reopening proceedings. [S. 10(38), 45, 148, Art. 226]
Krishnakumar J. Desai v. ITO (2022) 288 Taxman 309 (Mad.)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Court cannot go into the sufficiency of reasons assigned-Writ petition was dismissed. [S. 148, Art. 226]
Jiyand Ram Ahuja v. PCIT (2022) 288 Taxman 746 / 329 CTR 126 / 216 DTR 228/(2023) 457 ITR 140(MP)(HC)
S. 145 : Method of accounting-Unexplained investments Undervaluation of stock-Statement of director in the course of survey-Solely relying on statement of director addition cannot be made. [S. 69, 133A]
PCIT v. Ambika Sarees (P) Ltd. (2022) 288 Taxman 174 (Cal.) (HC)
S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Natural justice-Filed objection with supporting evidence-No infringement of principles of natural justice-Alternative remedy-Writ petition was dismissed. [S. 147, Art. 226]
Shanavas M. v. NFAC (2022) 288 Taxman 550 / 218 DTR 145/329 CTR 549 (Ker.)(HC)