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. 143(3): Assessment – Insolvency of Assessee — Claims to Interim Resolution Professional include claims not yet adjudicated — Insolvency petition during pendency of assessment proceedings — Revenue aware of petition and its approval — No claim before Interim Resolution Professional — Order of assessment and demand is not valid . [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 , S. 31 , The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016, Art. 226 ]
Rishi Ganga Power Corporation Ltd v. ACIT [2024] 464 ITR 133 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 250 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Stay of recovery – Pendency of appeal before CIT((A) for more than four years – As on 26 -9 -2024 , 5, 80, 188 appeals are pending – Revenue is not able to resolve the appeals by classifying the Appeals as per the issues concerning , the recurring issues, covered issues, etc- The Court held that no recovery should be made from the petitioners of any outstanding dues from the petitioners whose Appeals are pending during pendency of petitions . [ S.220, 226 , Art . 226 ]
Om Vision Infraspace Private Limited v. ITO ( Guj)( HC) www.itatonline.org
S. 4 : Charge of income-tax -Income – Capital or revenue – Member of Society – Hardship compensation amount received from builder is capital receipt – Not taxable as income from other sources .[ S.2(24), 56 ]
Monica Parmanand Mirchndani v .ITO ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org
S. 3: Amount payable by declarant-Seventy five per cent. of amount determined under scheme paid-Slight delay in paying balance due to circumstances beyond control-Delay is condoned-Direction issued to the respondent to immediately take necessary steps for issuance of form 5 under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. [S. 4,5, Art. 226]
Chandrakala Kasani v. PCIT (2024) 464 ITR 119 (Telangana)(HC)
Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020,
S. 2(1): Legacy Dispute Resolution-Deposit of tax arrears-Dropping of cheque in the drop box-Delay of three days in delay of deposit of cheque due to circumstances beyond control. [ITAct, 119, S. 3, 4, Art. 226]]
Digvendra Pratap Singh v. UOI (2024) 464 ITR 398// 296 Taxman 460 / 338 CTR 849 / 237 DTR 591 (All)(HC)
S. 279 : Offences and prosecutions-Sanction-Chief Commissioner-Commissioner-Compounding of offences-Application-Limitation-Application can be filed either before or subsequent to launching of prosecution-Circular issued by Central Board Of Direct Taxes stipulating limitation period of 12 months-Contrary to legislative intent of provision-Relevant clause of Circular struck down-Matter remitted to decide application on the merits. [S. 119(1), 279(2), Art.226]
Jay shree v. CBDT (2024) 464 ITR 81 (Mad)(HC)
S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-Eligibility to file declaration under scheme-Tax arrears-Not a tax arrear under VVSV Act, 2020-Rejection of application-Prosecution is not valid-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 139(1) 153A, Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, S. 2(1(o), Art.. 136 ]
PCIT. v. VPR Mining Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd(2024) 464 ITR 586 (SC) Editorial : VPR Mining Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI(2023)21 ITR-OL 491/ 2022 SCC OnLine TS 3438 (Telangana)(HC)
S. 264: Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Rectification of mistake-Long term capital gains-Time-Limit-Sale of flat inherited-Indexed cost of improvement-Omission of claim of deduction of Indexed renovation expenses in return of income-Rectification application is rejected on the ground that new claim was not raised earlier-Claim was accepted in other co-owners-Matter remanded for de novo consideration. [S. 45, 48, 50(C)(2), 143(3), 154, Art. 226]c
Pramod R. Agrawal v. PCIT (2024) 464 ITR 367 (Bom)(HC)
S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Delay of two years-Pedantic-Genuine hardship cannot be restricted to severe financial crises is only unwarranted-The Authorities have to do substantial justice-Directed to condone the delay and decide the matter on merits-Rectification of mistake-Duty of Assessing Officer-Pendency of rectification application for six years-The Assessing Officer duty bound to pass order expeditiously-The Hon Court directed to place Copy of this order to the Chairman of CBDT, so that suitable actions are taken to comply with the directions given by this court. [S. 44AB, 80IC, 119(2)(b), 143(1), 154, Art. 226, Form No 10CCB]
Pankaj Kailash Agarwal v. ACIT [2024] 464 ITR 65 / 161 taxmann.com 383 (Bom)(HC)
S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Delay of three years -Not explained sufficient cause in delay in filing an appeal-The lack of sincerity, or rather complete absence thereof on the part of the Revenue in this case was glaringly conspicuous by its having not even filed an application seeking condonation of this colossal delay of about three years in filing these appeals-Delay is not condoned.[S.260A(1) 260A(2)
PCIT v. Versatile Polytech Pvt. Ltd. (2024) 464 ITR 151 (Delhi)(HC)