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. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Shares or Derivatives-Reopening of Assessment has to be Tested or examined only on basis of reasons recorded and cannot be supplemented by affidavits-Notice vitiated by non-application of mind. [S. 148, 151, Art. 226]

Harish Gangji Dedhiya v. UOI (2022) 443 ITR 273 /140 taxmann.com 344 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Faceless Assessment-Limitation period for completion of Assessment by Assessing Officer on receipt of order of Dispute Resolution Panel against draft Assessment order-Not falling within period from March 20, 2020 to December 31, 2020 as stipulated under Section 3(1) of Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020-Assessment order barred by time and consequent demand and penalty notices set aside. [S. 143(3), 144B, 144C(1), 144C(5), 144C(13), 156, 270A, 274, Art. 226]

Shell India Markets Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 443 ITR 366 / 214 DTR 153 / 327 CTR 69 (Bom.) (HC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Limitation-Limitation prescribed by Section 153 Applies-Direction issued to Deputy Commissioner to take up the entire matter of the assessee for consideration at the earliest and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order and pass an appropriate order in writing. [S. 153, Art. 226]

Sabic Innovative Plastics India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 443 ITR 310 / 214 DTR 168(Guj.)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Violation of principle of natural justice-Extension of time to submit reply to notice was rejected Assessment order set aside. [S. 144B(1)(xvi), Art. 226]

Eastern Mattresses (P.) Ltd. v. NEAC (2022) 443 ITR 278 (Ker.) (HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Draft Assessment order-Variation in income-Assessee must be given opportunity to be heard. [S. 144B(1)(vi)(b), Art. 226]

Corpus Christi Educational Society v. NAES (2022) 443 ITR 318 / 211 DTR 22 / 325 CTR 230 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Principles of natural justice-The right of a man to have a fair opportunity of hearing is fundamental to any civilised legal system-Effective opportunity to be heard not given-Order of assessment set aside. [Art. 226]

Bhima Jewels v. PCIT (2022) 443 ITR 403 / 209 DTR 322 / 324 CTR 435 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Ex parte order-Failure to attend due to ill health-Order set aside. [S. 142(1), Art. 226]

Bernard Veilankanni Shema Priya (Mrs.) v. Assessing Officer (2022) 443 ITR 289 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Amalgamation of companies-Corporate death of entity upon amalgamation cannot invalidates Assessment order-No intimation regarding amalgamation nor revised return filed though time available after amalgamation-Notice issued-Conduct of assessee from date of search and before all forums consistently holding itself out as assessee-Assessment valid-Matter restored to Tribunal to hear appeal and cross-objections on merits. [S. 2(1A), 142(2A), 143(2), 153A, 170; Companies Act, 1956, S.394, 481]

PCIT v. Mahagun Realtors (P) Ltd. (2022) 443 ITR 194 / 212 DTR 201 / 326 CTR 1 /287 Taxman 566 (SC)

S. 142(2A) : Inquiry before assessment-Special audit-Voluminous material seized during Search-Bogus claims-If two or three queries out of forty five queries unwarranted, entire order giving directions could not be treated as nullity-Directions neither arbitrary, illegal nor beyond scope of provision. [Rule 14A, Form 6B]

Dishman Carbogen Amcis Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 443 ITR 227 / 212 DTR 127 / 325 CTR 707 / 285 Taxman 192 (SC) Dishman Infrastructure Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 443 ITR 227 / 212 DTR 127 / 325 CTR 707 / 285 Taxman 192 (SC) Editorial : Decision in Dishman Infrastructure Ltd v. ACIT (2021) 437 ITR 487(Guj)(HC) affirmed.

S. 132A : Powers-Requisition of books of account-Cash undisclosed seized by Excise Authorities-Deposited with Judicial Magistrate-Order giving only part of cash to Income-Tax Authorities-Not valid. [S. 131, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S. 451]

UOI v. State of Kerala (2022) 443 ITR 117 / 285 Taxman 677/ 215 DTR 407/ 215 DTR 407/ 327 CTR 467 (Ker.)(HC).