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. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-No exempt income during the year-Deletion of addition is justified. [R. 8D]

PCIT v Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd. (No. 2) (2023) 452 ITR 206 / 290 Taxman 201 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Charitable purposes-Business activity-Amendment makes it necessary to ascertain if activities are for earning profit or for purposes of charitable institution-Ascertainment of facts could not be made in writ proceedings-Writ petition was dismissed. [S. 2(15) Art. 226]

Tamizhavel P. T. Rajan v. ITO(E) (2023) 452 ITR 45/ 333 CTR 420/ 227 DTR 51 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Charitable purpose-Purpose of securing and assisting rapid and orderly establishment and organization of industrial areas and industrial estates in the State-Proviso not attracted-Entitle for exemption. [S. 2(15), 12, 13(8)]

CIT(E) v. Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (2023) 452 ITR 27/292 Taxman 207 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Charitable Purpose-School-Income from newspapers, which included advertisement revenue and surplus-Matter remanded for fresh consideration of nature of receipts and whether they qualified for exemption. [S. 2(15)]

PCIT(E) v. Servants of People Society (2023) 452 ITR 1 / 330 CTR 617 / 222 DTR 185 (SC) Editorial : PCIT (E) v. Servants of People Society (2022) 447 ITR 99 (Delhi)(HC) partly reversed.

Expenditure Tax Act, 1987

S. 2(6): Hotel – Dual occupancy room in Hotels — Expenditure-Tax chargeable where room charges “Per Individual” Less than Rs. 1,200 — Exemption not allowable .[ S. 2(8),2(10) , 3 , 4(a) , Art 136 ]

Fomento Resorts and Hotels Ltd. v. ACIT (2023)452 ITR 248 (SC) Editorial: SLP of the assessee is dismissed, Fomento Resorts and Hotels Ltd. v. ACIT ( T.A. No. 64 of 2007 dt 30 -8 -2019 ( Bom)( HC )

Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020

S.4: Filing of declaration and particulars to be furnished — Delay in filing appeal – Delay of 958 days was condoned – Delay was condoned – Directed to accept the declaration filed by the assessee. [ S 2(1)(a) ITACT , S. 250, 260A ]

PCIT v. Aditya Saraf (HUF) (2023) 452 ITR 87/ 330 CTR 321/ 221 DTR 241 (Cal)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment – Natural justice – Hearing though video conference – Voluminous documents – Department has agreed to provide physical hearing at Chennai – Faceless converted to interface – Assessment order was set aside – Petitioner was directed to appear before Assessing Officer at Chennai . [ S. 11, 260A, Art ,226 ]

Chennai Port Authority v. NFAC ( 2023)) 454 ITR 692 ( Mad)( HC) www.itatonline .org

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal – Duties- Numbering of paragraphs in all orders – The Supreme Court urges the High Court and Tribunals to follow a uniform format for all its orders.

BS Hari v. UOI 2023 (SC) www.itatonline .org

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Re development of building – Monthly rental compensation received from the builder for rent of alternative accommodation – Not utilised for paying alternative accommodation – Capital receipt – Not taxable as income from other sources – Delay of 1566 days in filing the appeal is condoned . [ S. 56, 254(1) ]

Ajay Parasmal Kothari v. ITO ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org

S. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Violation of principles of Natural Principle – Order passed against assessee without considering the reply – Remitted back the to the Assessing Officer to issue fresh notice and provide time period of 7 days to file a reply and the assessee was directed to file a reply through E-governance only. [S. 148 (d), 148 (b), Art. 226]

Ravishankar G. v. ITO (2022) 327 CTR 61 (Mad)(HC)