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. 10(38) : Long term capital gains from equities – Sale of shares – Securities transactions tax was paid – Mere presumptions and suspicion – Exemption cannot be denied [ S. 45 ]

Mukesh Nanubhai Desai v . ACIT (2022)96 ITR 258 (Surat) (Trib)

S. 10(2A) : Share income of partner – Details of partners with their PAN copy of returns of firm with computation of income was furnished – Partner entitled to exemption .

Mukesh Nanubhai Desai v . ACIT (2022)96 ITR 258 (Surat) (Trib)

S. 68 : Cash credits – Demonetization – Cash deposited – Cash sales – Demonization -Addition as undisclosed income was not justified- Construction of showroom -Difference in valuation was less than 10 percent – Addition was deleted [ S. 69 , 153A ]

Charu Aggarwal (Smt.) . Dy. CIT (2022) 96 ITR 66 (Trib) (Chd)( Trib) Kalaneedhi Jewellers LLP v. Dy. CIT (2022)96 ITR 66 (Trib) (Chd)( Trib)

S. 270AA : Immunity from imposition of penalty,etc- Order was set aside-Directed to grant immunity. [S. 270A, 270AA(2), Art. 226]

Ultimate Infratech P. Ltd. v. NFAC (2022) 213 DTR 249 / 326 CTR 547 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 226 : Collection and recovery – Modes of recovery – Stay – Failure to deduct tax at source-Interest payment made to foreign bank-No financial hardship-Directed to deposit 20 per cent of total demand-DTAA-India-China. [S. 201(1), 201(IA), Art. 11(3), Art. 226]

Tata Teleservices Ltd. v. CIT (2022) 216 DTR 286 / 328 CTR 481 / 145 taxmann.com 142/(2023)451 ITR 331 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Non-sharing of material information on the basis of which reassessment proceedings are undertaken isviolative of the Act and denies an effective opportunity to the assessee to file a response to the same. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 226]

Aryan Management Service (P) Ltd. v ITO (2022) 217 DTR 438 / 328 CTR 728 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Show cause notice-Writ petition was dismissed. [S. 148, 148A(b) 148A(d), Art, 226]

Yellaiah Setty v. ACIT (2022) 327 CTR 600 / 143 taxmann.com 326 / 216 DTR 128 (Telangana) (HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Principles of natural justice-Assessee filed explanation to 148A(b) notice along with documents and sought time file additional documents in support of the explanation-Time sought by the assesse was not granted and 148A(d) order was passed denying filing of documents in response to 148A(b)-Matter remitted back. [S. 148A(d), Art. 226]

Thiyangarajan Venkatraman v. ITO (2022) 214 DTR 377 / 327 CTR 66 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Order passed under section 148A(d) is not a final adjudicating order but a preliminary order – Assesse is entitled to full opportunity to raise objections during the course of reassessment proceedings – Petition was dismissed as premature.[S. 148A(b), 148(a)(d), 149, Art, 226]

Sylph Technologies Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 218 DTR 436/ 329 CTR 244/ 2023) 451 ITR 495 (MP)(HC)

S. 148 : Reassessment -Notice – After the expiry of four years- Notifications issued by the Central Government under the Taxation and other laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 did not apply as the notices were issued prior to 1st April 2021- Time limit – Notices issued prior to 1st April 2021 beyond a period of four years from the expiry of the assessment year are time barred in terms of first proviso to section 147 as applicable prior to amendment made by the Finance Act, 2021- Sanction – Notice issued after seeking approval Jt. CIT instead of Chief CIT/ CIT Jt CIT instead of Chief CIT/ CIT- Notice was invalid. [S. 147, 151, Art, 226]

Ambika Iron & Steel (P) Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 326 CTR 871 / 213 DTR 446/ /(2023)452 ITR 285 (Orissa)(HC)