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-Substantial question of law-High Court asked to formulate the second question of law as proposed by the Revenue as one of the substantial questions of law where High Court had already admitted the first question of law. [S. 13(1)(c), Art. 136]

PCIT v. Sinhagad Technical Education Society [2025] 302 Taxman 424 / 472 ITR18 / 342 CTR 354(SC). Editorial : PCIT (Central) v. Sinhagad Technical Education Society [IT Appeal No. 1454 of 2017, dated 24-11-2021] (para 12) reversed.

S. 237: Refunds-Direction to Revenue to refund excess tax paid by assessee-Such direction was duly complied with after adjusting self-assessed liability-SLP to be disposed of. [Art. 136]

PCIT v. Aditya Eastern India Pvt. Ltd. J.K. [2025] 302 Taxman 416 (SC). Editorial : Aditya Eastern (India) Agencies (P.) Ltd. v. Chairperson, Central Board of Direct Taxes [2024] 169 taxmann.com 355 (Orissa)(HC)

S. 197 : Deduction at source-Certificate for lower rate-Most Favoured Nation-DTAA-India-Netherlands [S. 9(1) (1), Art. 10]

ITO v. Deccan Holdings B.V. (2025) 170 taxmann.com 663 /303 Taxman 336/ 472 ITR 639 /342CTR 577 (SC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Revenue itself wanted the Order under S. 148A(d) to be set aside with liberty to issue fresh notice under S. 148A(b)-Order of High Court rejecting Writ Application of the Petitioner thereby affirming the order under S. 148A(d) is set aside with liberty as prayed for. [S. 147, 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 136]

Radha Soami Satsang Beas v. NFAC [2025] 302 Taxman 420 (SC). Editorial : Radha Soami Satsang Beas v. NFAC [2024] 169 taxmann.com 477 (Punj. & Har.)(HC) (para 7) Set aside

S. 80DD: Medical treatment of dependent-Disability-Amendment made to S. 80DD vide Finance Act, 2022 cannot be applied retrospectively to policies taken prior to 2014. [Art. 32]

Ravi Agrawal v. UOI [2025] 302 Taxman 15 (SC). Editorial : Ravi Agrawal v. UOI [2019] 260 Taxman 352/410 ITR 399 (SC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-SLP dismissed against High Court’s finding that additions were unjustified-Huge amounts deposited in foreign bank account in Geneva-Assessee pleaded that bank account belonged to nephew situated in UK-Assessee was an agriculturist and his name was struck from the bank account much prior to his visit to Geneva-SLP dismissed also on the ground of delay of 233 days, which was not explained properly.[Art. 136]

PCIT v. Joginder Singh Chatha [2025] 302 Taxman 5 (SC). Editorial : CIT v. Joginder Singh Chatha[2023] 156 taxmann.com 509 (P& H)(HC)

S. 68: Cash credits-AO made additions towards consideration received by assessee on sale of shares-Assessee had duly disclosed receipt of capital gains and offered for tax-No occasion for making addition-SLP to be dismissed on ground of low tax effect. [S. 153A, Art. 136].

PCIT v. Ahinsa Vinimay [2025] 302 Taxman 359 (SC). Editorial : PCIT v. Ahinsa Vinimay (P.) Ltd. [2024] 169 taxmann.com 134 (Orissa)(HC)

S. 28(i): Business income-Capital gains-Delay of 752 days-Not satisfactorily explained-SLP of Revenue is dismissed.[S. 45, Art. 136]

Radha Madhav Investments (P.) Ltd. v. Dy.CIT [2025] 302 Taxman 358 (SC). Editorial : Radha Madhav Investments (P.) Ltd v.Dy.CIT (2022) 143 taxmann.com 421 (Bom)(HC)

S. 2(47) : Transfer-definition-“Extinguishment of any right there in”-Reduction of share capital by company amounts to reduction of rights of shareholder to share in distribution of net assets upon liquidation extinguished proportionately-Such reduction of rights is Transfer within the meaning of section 2(47) of the Act.[S. 45]

PCIT v. Jupiter Capital Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 472 ITR 616 /303 Taxman 95 (SC) Editorial : Pr CIT v. Jupiter Capital (P.) Ltd. [IT Appeal No. 299 of 2019 dated 20-2-2023] (para 10) affirmed. (2025) 472 ITR 561 (Karn.) (HC)

S. 50 :Capital gains – Depreciable assets – Block of assets – Rate of tax – Deeming fiction is to be confined only to section 50 and it could not convert short term capital asset into long term capital asset and vice versa for other purpose of Act – Rate of tax would be in terms of section 112 at rate of 20 percent and not 30 percent .[ S. 2(29AA) 2(29B ), 2( 42A) , 45 , 48,49, 112(1) ]

SKF India v. DCIT. [2025] 121 ITR 307/ 210 ITD 1 (SB)( Mum)( Trib)