S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Co-operative societies-Deduction under section 80P-Notice is issued in SLP filed by the Revenue. [S. 80P(2)(a)(i), 80P(4), Regional Rural Development Act, 1976, S. 22]
PCIT v. Baroda Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank (2023) 294 Taxman 433 (SC) Editorial: Refer, PCIT v. Baroda Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank (2022) 447 ITR 218/ 138 taxmann.com 449 (All)(HC)
Digest of case laws
Online digest of latest case laws
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. 268A : Appeal-Instructions-Circulars-Monetary limits-Low tax effect-Appeal of Revenue is dismissed. [Art. 136]
PWT v. Oriental Building & Furnishing Co. Ltd. (2023) 294 Taxman 2/ 333 CTR 1 (SC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Interest on refunds-Order passed giving effect to the order of the CIT(A)-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order is affirmed. [S. 244A]
PCIT v. Bank of Baroda (2023) 294 Taxman 455/333 CTR 835 (Bom)(HC)/Editorial : SLP of Revenue is dismissed , PCIT v. Bank of Baroda (2024) 300 Taxman 266 (SC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to Revenue-Tax on distributed income to shareholders-Revision order barred by limitation-Provisions not applicable for the year under consideration. [S. 115QA(1), 154, The Companies Act, S. 77, 402]
PCIT v. C. M. Rajgarhia (P.) Ltd. (2023) 294 Taxman 288 /(2024) 336 CTR 606(Cal)(HC)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Capital gains-Full value of consideration-Stamp valuation-Land was sold by secured creditors-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order is affirmed. [S. 45, 50C, 143(1), The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act)]
S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Appeal-Appeal against the assessment order and revision order-Both orders to be heard together. [S. 10B(7), 80IA (8), 263]
PCIT v. Spicer India Ltd (No. 2) (2023) 458 ITR 42/ 294 Taxman 740 (Bom)(HC)S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 1110 days-Delay was due to change in their Standing Counsel and previous counsel’s failure to inform them about appeal’s status-Delay was not condoned-Appeal was dismissed.
DIT (IT) v. Western Union Financial Services Inc (2023) 459 ITR 56 / 153 taxmann.com 703 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: Delay was condoned and the order of High Court is set aside to decide on merit, DIT (IT) v. Western Union Financial Services Inc. (2023) 459 ITR 58 /294 Taxman 704 / 333 CTR 450 (SC).S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 707 days-Sufficient cause-Heavy workload-Lack of man power-Delay was not condoned-[S. 263, Art. 226]
CIT v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 153 taxmann.com 676 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial : Delay was condoned and the order of High Court is set aside to decide on merit, CIT (C) v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 456 ITR 773 / 294 Taxman 702 (SC)S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 707 days-Sufficient cause-Heavy workload-Lack of man power-Delay was condoned-Directed the High Court to decide on merits.[S. 263, Art. 136]
CIT (C) v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 456 ITR 773 / 294 Taxman 702 /(2024) 337 CTR 375(SC) Editorial : CIT v. Surya Vinayaka Industries Ltd. (2023) 153 taxmann.com 676 (Delhi)(HC)S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of 1110 days-Delay was due to change in their Standing Counsel and previous counsel’s failure to inform them about appeal’s status-Matter was to be restored to High Court-Cost of Rs 5000 was imposed. [Art. 136]
DIT (IT) v. Western Union Financial Services Inc. (2023) 459 ITR 58 /294 Taxman 704 / 333 CTR 450 (SC) Editorial : DIT (IT) v. Western Union Financial Services Inc (2023) 459 ITR 56 / 153 taxmann.com 703 (Delhi)(HC)