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. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-No conflict between provision of DTAA between India and Netherlands-Non-discrimination and there was no ambiguity in classification and rates of tax, assessee, which is not a ‘domestic company’, is liable to tax at rates prescribed for a company ‘other than a domestic company’-DTAA-India-Netherlands. [S. 2(17), 2(23A), 90, Art. 24(2)]

Royal Bank of Scotland N. V. v. CIT (2024) 341 CTR 981 / 162 taxmann.com 780 (Cal.)(HC)

Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020

S.4: Filing of declaration and particulars to be furnished – Amount payable by declarant – Eligible assessee- Pendency of appeal – Rejection of declaration- Appeal filed by the assessee in the year 2015 was not pending as on 31st Jan., 2020—Order passed by the Tribunal recalling the order – Appeal of the assessee has to be considered as pending as on 31st Jan., 2020 which is the specified date as per the VSV Act— Order of rejection is quashed . [S. 3 , 5(2), ITAct , S. 254(1), Art. 226 ]

Atul Roshanlal Gupta v .PCIT (2024) 167 Taxmann.com 634 / 341 CTR 569 / 242 DTR 433 / 8 NYPCTR 1170 (Guj)(HC)

S. 271B :Penalty-Failure to get accounts audited-Running a milk booth for distribution of products of Mother Dairy and Vegetables Pvt Ltd-Commission income-Bona fide belief-Penalty is not leviable. [S.44AB, 273B]

Tasavver Husain v. ITO (2024)113 ITR 236 (Agra)(Trib)

S. 271AAA : Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007-Undisclosed Income-Surrender of income-Specific charge-Burden of proof to establish there was undisclosed income is on Assessing Officer-Penalty is deleted.[S. 132, 132(4)]

Ajay Kumar Sood Engineers and Contractors v.Dy. CIT (2024)113 ITR 34 (SN)(Chd)(Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Depreciation on Biometric devices at 60 Per Cent. Computer block-Assessing Officer allowing depreciation at 15 Per Cent-Penalty is deleted. [S. 2(11), 32]

Mahaonline Ltd. v. CIT (Appeals) (2024)113 ITR 47 (SN)(Mum)(Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Notice not specifying the charge of proceedings initiated-Penalty is bad in law.[S. 274]

India Flysafe Aviation Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2024)113 ITR 431 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 270A:Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income-Mens rea must be present-Mere additions penalty cannot be imposed. [S. 40A(3), 270A(9)(d), 270AA

Punam Kanwar Bhati v. ITO (2024)113 ITR 750/229 TTJ 518/237 DTR 297 (Jodhpur) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Death of assessee-Commissioner was intimated of death of assessee-Order passed in the name of dead person-Order is bad in law-Additional ground is admitted.[S. 254(1)]

Sangeeta Saini (Smt.) v. ITO (2024)113 ITR 52 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Business promotion expenses-Freebies-Change of opinion–Cannot revise the order where the Assessing Officer has conducted enquiry and allowed expenses. [S. 37(1)]

HBC Lifesciences P. Ltd. v. PCIT (2024)113 ITR 65 (SN)(Ahd)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Income from other sources-Share valuation-Issue of right shares-Deeming provision-Revision on ground unsecured loans not included in valuation-Revision order is set aside. [S 56(2)(viib, R.11UA)

Tiki Tar Industries Baroda Ltd. v. PCIT (2024)113 ITR 388 /228 TTJ 227/235 DTR 49 (Ahd)(Trib)