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-Effect of third proviso to Section 147-Income which was the subject matter of appeal-Notice Of Reassessment In Respect Of Such Income Not Valid. [S.80IB(10), 148, 250, Art. 226]

Poonam Builders v. ACIT (2024)466 ITR 186/162 taxmann.com 238 (Bom)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Financial cost-Interest-Tax deducted at source-Query was raised in the course of original assessment proceedings-Reassessment notice on same issue is not valid.[S. 148, Art. 226]

Geopreneur Realty Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI (2024)466 ITR 640 (Bom)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Capital gains-Sale consideration-Division of income between spouses and not assets for capital gains-Portuguese Civil Code-Notice based on wrong facts and erroneous reasons-Notice and order disposing the objection is quashed. [S.5A, 50C, 133A, 148, Art. 226]

Sunita Purushottam Virgincar (Smt.) v. ITO (2024)466 ITR 238/164 taxmann.com 352 (Bom)(HC)

S. 145 : Method of accounting-Survey-Excess-stock-Surrender-Reflected in sales and closing stock-Accounting treatment is held to be proper-Investment in excess stocks to be taxed as part of business income and not as income from other sources. Proper-Accrual-Notional interest-Lower interest charged from wife of one of partners-Commercial expediency-Notional addition is not justified-Partners were paid interest at 12 Per Cent. and balance in partners’ account much more than amount advanced to wife of partner-Disallowance is to be restricted at 2 Per Cent.[S. 4, 5,,28(i), 69, 133A]

PCIT v. Bajargan Traders [2017] 86 taxmann.com 295 / (2024) 466 ITR 397 (Raj)(HC)

S. 144BA : Reference to Principal Commissioner or Commissioner in certain cases-Avoidance of tax-Applicability of Chapter X-A-Multiple share transactions indicating intention to avoid tax-Burden of proof on assessee to prove contrary —Evidence that share transactions not qualifying as permissible under tax laws-Chapter X-A is applicable. [S. 95 to 102, Art. 226]

Ayodhya Rami Reddy v.PCIT (2024)466 ITR 497 / 339 CTR 497 /163 taxmann.com 277 (Telangana)(HC) Oxford Ayyappa Consulting Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2024)466 ITR 497 / 339 CTR 497 /163 taxmann.com 277 (Telangana)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Principle of natural justice-Alternative remedy-Assessment order is set aside. [143(3), 144B(6)(viii), Art. 226]

Sitaram Shyam Sundar Fashions Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI (2024)466 ITR 231/300 Taxman 142 (Cal)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Proposed variation in income-Standard operating procedure-Order shall not be passed prior to expiry of seven days from date of issuance of show-cause-Violation of principles of natural justice-Assessment order and consequential notices of demand and penalty set aside-Matter remanded. [142(1), 143(3), 144B(6)(vii), 156, 272A(1)(d), 274, Art.226]

Monika Jaiswal v. UOI (2024)466 ITR 488/300 taxman 206 (Cal)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Circulars and instructions of Central Board Of Direct Taxes-Notice must be given for proposed additions along with necessary evidence.[S.119, 144B(8) Art. 226]

Inox Wind Energy Ltd. v. ACIT (2024)466 ITR 463 (Guj)(HC)

S. 127 : Power to transfer cases-Centralisation of assessment-Once case is centralised transfer of case without decentralisation order or transfer order is contrary to provision-Transfer of case is invalid-Transferee Assessing Officer has no inherent jurisdiction to pass assessment orders making additions to income-Assessment orders and orders of Tribunal is set aside-Liberty Given To Proceed In Accordance With Law Through Jurisdictional Assessing Officer-Interpretation of taxing statute-Machinery Provision.[S. 56(2)(viia), 120, 124, 127(2), Art. 226]

Raj Sheela Growth Fund Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 466 ITR 26/165 taxmann.com 182/ 340 CTR 113 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Charitable purpose-Revised return of income-Delay-Condonation of delay-Genuine hardship-Bona fide reasons to be understood in context of circumstances-Application for condonation of delay was allowed. [S. 2(15), 11(1),119(2(b), 139(5), Art. 226]

Oneness Educational and Charitable Trust v. CIT (E) (2024)466 ITR 654 / 338 CTR 733/161 taxmann.com 544 (Orissa)(HC)