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. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Method of accounting-Tribunal calling for information and affidavit filed in response by assessee-Affidavit not referred to by Tribunal or by High Court-Orders of Tribunal and High Court set aside and matters remitted to Tribunal for consideration afresh. [S. 254(1), 256(2), 260A]

Prajatantra Prachar Samity v. CIT (2022) 443 ITR 15 / 213 DTR 440 / 326 CTR 569 / 287 Taxman 667 (SC)

S. 10B: Export oriented undertakings-Reconstruction-New unit formed in 1998 fully independent with higher production capacity, located at separate plot-New undertaking-Entitled to exemption.

CIT v. Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt. Ltd. (2022) 443 ITR 34 / 211 DTR 305 / 325 CTR 507/ 286 Taxman 221 (SC) Editorial : Decision in CIT v. Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt. Ltd. (No. 1) (2020) 429 ITR 207 (Bom)(HC) affirmed.

S. 5 : Benami Transaction Limitation-Order passed within time limit-Delay in communication-Order not barred by limitation-Alternative remedy-Writ is not maintainable.[S.24(1),24(3), 24(5), 26(3), 26(7), 46, 114 Art, 226]

Adjudicating Authority v. Anuttam Academic Institutions (2022) 442 ITR 509 / 286 Taxman 400(Mad.)(HC) Editorial : Decision of single judge reversed ; Advance Infradevelopers Pvt. Ltd. v. Adjudicating Authority (2022)442 ITR 477 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 191 : Tax paid under the Scheme shall not be refunded-Paid two instalments- Default in paying final instalment- Seeking extension of time to pay third instalment-Request rejected by High Court-Direction that assessee be given benefit of amounts deposited towards first two instalments while reckoning tax liability of assessee after revised assessment. [S. 183, 185, Art. 226]

Yogesh Roshanlal Gupta v. CBDT (2022) 442 ITR 31 / 212 DTR 313 / 326 CTR 34 / 286 Taxman 95 (SC) Editorial : Order of Gujarat High Court is modified, Yogesh Roshanlal Gupta v. CBDT (2021) 432 ITR 91 /199 DTR 81/ 319 CTR 389 / 280 Taxman 278 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 2(5B) : Charge of tax-Financial company-Transfer of distribution business to a new company-Matter remanded-Interpretation of taxing statute-Charging provision must be construed strictly. [S. 2(7)]

Dadha Pharma (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 442 ITR 93 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 281B : Provisional attachment-Power must not be exercised in an arbitrary manner-Recovery proceedings against assignee of Partner’s Share in firm-Provisional Attachment Of Property Of Firm is not valid-Interpretation of taxing statute-The golden rule of interpretation of statutes is that the statute has to be construed according to its plain, literal and grammatical meaning, unless it leads to absurdity. [Indian Partnership Act, 1932, S. 29]

Raghunandan Enterprise v. ACIT (2022)442 ITR 460 / 211 DTR 345 / 328 CTR 99(Guj.)(HC)

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Self assessment-Default in payment of tax on time-Paying tax in instalments-No mala fide intention to evade tax. [S. 140A(3), 226, 276(2)]

S. P. Velayutham v. ACIT (2022) 442 ITR 74/ 215 DTR 265/327 CTR 779 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 271C : Penalty-Failure to deduct at source-Interest on fixed deposits-Agra Development Authority-Statutory Body-Not liable to deduct tax at source-Levy of penalty is not valid. [S. 194A(3)(iii)(f), Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning And Development Act, 1973]

Union Bank of India v. Add. CIT (TDS) (2022) 442 ITR 194 / 211 DTR 308 / 325 CTR 505 / 286 Taxman 353 (SC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Faceless penalty scheme-rejection of request for personal hearing-Order set aside. [S. 144B, 274, Art. 226]

Ramco Cements Ltd. v. NFAC (2022)442 ITR 279/ 327 CTR 231 /215 DTR 199 / 139 taxmann.com 89 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Binding precedent-Subordinate Authority to follow the ruing of Higher Authority-Rejection of revision petition on ground that appeal pending in High Court on similar issue against order of Tribunal-Held to be not proper-Matter remanded for de novo consideration. [S. 260, Art. 226]

Karanja Terminal and Logistic Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 442 ITR 400 / 211 DTR 161 / 325 CTR 392 / 287 Taxman 410 Bom.)(HC)