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. 80IB(10) : Housing projects- Commencement of development of residential project – Owner or developer -Date of approval -Ownership of land – Joint venture – The project for which permission was granted on 24 th July 2002 was not the same as that for which the ID lapsed in 2001- Eligible to deduction .

CIT v. Abode Builders (2022) (2022) 448 ITR 262 / 213 DTR 251/ 326 CTR 262 ( Bom)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits – Enquiry was conducted by the Assessing Officer -Transaction was through banking channel- Creditworthiness established – Statement of lenders recorded – Explanation was not found to be false – Deletion of addition is affirmed [ S. 131(1)(d) ]

PCIT v. Aarhat Investments ( 2022) BCAJ- May – P. 47 ( Bom)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Penalty for under -reporting and misreporting of income – Revision proceedings held to be not valid merely for non initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act .[ S. 270A]

Coimbatore Vaiyapuri Maathesh v.ITO( 2022) BCAJ – August – P. 85 ( Chennai )( Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –
Donation – CSR expenses – Donation to trust – Restriction under Explanation 2 section 37 does not apply – Revision is not valid .[ S. 37(1),80G ]

Naik Seafoods Ltd v .PCIT (2022 ) BCAJ – February -P. 38 ( Mum)( Trib)

S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal – Appeal – Appeal filed by a company , struck off by the time it was taken up for hearing – Appeal is maintainable [ S. 68, 179 , Companies Act, 2013 , 248(1), 248(5) 248(6) ]

Dwarka Portfolio Pvt Ltd v .ACIT ( 2022)) 99 ITR 620 / 195 ITD 491 /BCAJ- August -P. 67 ( Delhi ) ( Trib)

S. 195 :Deduction at source – Non-resident – Purchase of property- Payee filed the return of income and disclosed the consideration in their respective returns and paid the taxes – Proviso to section 201(1) inserted by the Finance( No. 2) Act , 2019 is retrospective as it removes statutory over sums paid to non-residents [ S. 201 (1), 201(IA) ]

Shree Balaji Concepts v. ITO (IT) (2022) 195 ITD 632 (Panaji)( Trib)

S.145 :Method of accounting – Construction business – Business income -Percent completion project – Cost of project – Income from TDR- SRA project – TDR is inextricably linked to the project – Cost of building has to be deducted against sale of TDR -Matter remanded [ S. 28(1)]

DBS Reality v.ACIT ( 2022) BCAJ- February -P. 40 ( Mum)( Trib)

S. 143(1)(a) : Assessment – Intimation – Any sum received from employees –Adjustment made without giving an intimation is held to be bad in law [ S. 36(1)(va), 43B ]

Arham Pumps v.DCIT ( 2022) 195 ITD 679 /BCAJ – June – P. 42 ( Ahd)( Trib)

S. 140 : Return by whom to be signed – Company – Appeal filed was verified by General Manager of assessee-company who did not hold a valid Power of Attorney-, Appeal was dismissed in limine [ S. 140(c), 253(6) , Rule 45(3) 47(1), ITAT R. 11. ]

Bangalore Electricity Supply Co. Ltd v.DCIT( 2022) 195 ITD 188 (Bang )( Trib)

S. 68 : Cash credits – NRI – Gifts from relatives – Cash deposited in bank – There is no prohibition for the NRI for accepting gifts from relatives – Addition was deleted [ S. 131 , 133(6) ]

Atul H Patel v.ITO ( 2022) 195 ITD 297 / BCAJ -July – P. 79 (Ahd)( Trib)