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. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Special category states-Expansion of business-Merger-Court held that since Tribunal categorically held that assessee was entitled to deduction at 100 per cent, act of Principal Commissioner amounted to revision of order of Tribunal which is beyond jurisdiction of Principal Commissioner-Order of Tribunal is affirmed. No substantial question of law.[S. 80IC 260A]

CIT v. Valco Industries Ltd. (2024) 300 Taxman 219 (P & H)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Capital gains-High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal quashing of revision order.[S. 45]

PCIT v. SPML Infra Ltd. (2024) 164 taxmann.com 504 (Cal)(HC) Editorial : SLP of Revenue is dismissed, delay of 484 days is not explained, PCIT v. SPML Infra Ltd. (2024) 300 Taxman 366 (SC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Capital gains-High Court affirmed the quashing of revision order-SLP of Revenue is dismissed, delay of 484 days is not explained.[S. 45, Art. 136]

PCIT v. SPML Infra Ltd. (2024) 300 Taxman 366 /240 DTR 41 (SC) Editorial : PCIT v. SPML Infra Ltd. (2024) 164 taxmann.com 504 (Cal)(HC)

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-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 244A, Art. 136]

PCIT v. Bank of Baroda (2024) 300 Taxman 266 (SC) Editorial : PCIT v. Bank of Baroda(2023) 294 Taxman 455 /333 CTR 835 (Bom)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Circulars-Monetary limits-Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Tax liability in revenue appeal was below Rs. 1 crore, in view of Circular No. 5/2024, dated 15-3-2024 appeal is not maintainable before High Court. [S. 263, 268A]

PCIT v. Bhupendra Sharma (HUF) (2024) 300 Taxman 615 (All.)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Review petition-First review petition was dismissed, benefit of authority in case of Khoday Distilleries Ltd v. Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd(2019) 262 Taxman 279 (SC) would not be applicable to facts-Second review petition was also to be dismissed.

Garden City Education Trust v. Dy. CIT (E) (2024) 165 taxmann.com 463 (Karn)(HC) Editorial : SLP against dismissal of review petition is dismissed, Garden City Education Trust v. Dy. CIT (E) (2024) 300 Taxman 594 (SC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Review petition before High Court which was dismissed as withdrawn without any liberty-SLP against order of High Court which was also dismissed-Another Review petition is also dismissed-SLP is dismissed. [Art. 136]

Garden City Education Trust v. Dy. CIT (E) (2024) 300 Taxman 594 (SC) Editorial : Garden City Education Trust v. Dy. CIT (E) (2024) 165 taxmann.com 463 (Karn)(HC), affirmed.

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Ex parte order by the Tribunal-Un explained cash credits-Negligent of the Chartered Accountant to make effective representation before the Tribunal-Negligence was not attributable to assessee,-Matter is restored before Tribunal to give an opportunity of hearing-Directed to deposit cost of Rs 25000 before the Tribunal.[S. 68, 260A]

Desert Infraspace (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2024) 300 Taxman 406 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 268A : Appeal – Monetary limits – Less than Rs.1 crore – Appeal of Revenue is dismissed – Contribution to construction of new bridge – Capital of revenue .[ S.37(1), 260A ]

CIT v. Velingkar Brothers [2020] 114 taxmann.com 727 (Bom)( HC)

S. 158BC : Block assessment – No assessment could be made under section 158BC without issuing a notice u/s. 143(2) .[ S.143(2), 260A ]

CIT v. Sodder Builder & Developers (P.) Ltd. [2020] 115 taxmann.com 251 (Bom)( HC)