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. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry and providing opportunity before issue of notice-Reopening after approval of resolution plan under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code-Alleged transactions with shell companies for tax evasion-CIRP cannot be used to defeat reassessment proceedings-Writ petition dismissed. [S. 148,148A(b), 148A(d), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, S.31, Art. 14, 19, 226]

VRDV Traders (P.) Ltd. v. UOI (2025) 176 taxmann.com 80 / 345 CTR 729 / 252 DTR 167 (Telangana)(HC)

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Notice-Limitation-Where the first notice under s. 148 issued on 23-6-2021 (to be treated as notice under s. 148A(b) in view of Ashish Agarwal) was within extended time up to 30-6-2021 under TOLA, the order under s. 148A(d) and consequential second notice under S. 148 were required to be issued within seven days of assessee’s reply; second notice dated 14-7-2022 being beyond limitation, entire proceedings quashed. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 149, 151, Art. 226]

Pratishtha Garg v. ACIT (2025) 345 CTR 472 / 250 DTR 383 / 174 taxmann.com 973 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Limitation-Notice under s. 148A(b) issued on 28-3-2024 within three years is the relevant date for computing limitation-Subsequent notice dated 22-4-2024 issued pursuant to assessee’s reply does not extend or shift limitation-Notice under s. 148 dated 30-4-2024 not barred by limitation. [S. 148, 148A(b), 149(1), Art. 226]

Chandra Shekhar v. PCIT (2025) 345 CTR 385 / 251 DTR 315 (Pat)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Search and seizure-Reasons recorded based on material unearthed during search-Where proceedings are founded on search material, recourse must be taken under sections 153A/153C and not under section 147-Notice issued under section 147 held without jurisdiction. [S. 132, 148, 153A, 153C, Art. 226]

Sejal Jewellery v. UOI (2025) 171 taxmann.com 846 / 345 CTR 681 / 252 DTR 145 (Bom)(HC)

S. 147: Reassessment-Alternative remedy-writ petition almost after expiry of one year from the date of passing the impugned assessment order-Writ petition dismissed. [S. 144, 144B, 148, Art. 226]

D.D. Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. UOI (2025) 345 CTR 658 / 251 DTR 100 (Cal)(HC) Editorial : Review petition allowed, order of single judge recalled, D.D. Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. UOI (2025) 174 taxmann.com 215 / 345 CTR 652 / 251 DTR 93 (Cal)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Capital gains-Exemption under S. 54F-Investment in a residential house-Separate floors of same house purchased by family members-To be regarded as one residential house-No failure to disclose material facts-Reopening invalid [S. 45, 54F, 260A]

PCIT v. Lata Goel (2025) 345 CTR 121 / 250 DTR 441 / 174 taxmann.com 535 (Delhi)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Deduction claimed twice-Reassessment is justified.[S.37(1), 148, Art. 226]

Pharmazell (India) (P) Ltd. v ACIT (2025) 345 CTR 486 / 251 DTR 144 (Mad)(HC) Editorial : Pharmazell (India) (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 345 CTR 478 / 251 DTR 135 / 173 taxmann.com 181 (Mad)(HC), affirmed.

S. 147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Double deduction-Failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts-Reopening valid-Writ not maintainable when alternate remedy availed-Order of Single Judge affirmed.[S. 37(1), 148, Art. 226]

Pharmazell (India) (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 345 CTR 478 / 251 DTR 135 / 173 taxmann.com 181 (Mad)(HC). Editorial: Pharmazell (India) (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 345 CTR 486 / 251 DTR 144 (Mad)(HC), affirmed.

S. 144C : Reference to Dispute Resolution Panel-Transfer pricing-Assessment pursuant to Tribunal remand-Failure to pass draft assessment order-Assessment order passed without complying with section 144C procedure is void and illegal..[S.92CA, 144C(1), Art. 226]

Enfinity Solar Solutions (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 176 taxmann.com 170 / 345 CTR 739 / 251 DTR 473 (Mad)(HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Principle of natural justice —Strictures-Assessment order passed without granting or rejecting adjournment request-Systemic deficiencies in faceless assessment and portal functioning resulting in violation of rule of law-Assessment, penalty and demand orders quashed-Work Domain-Directions issued to strengthen tax administration and ensure compliance with Court orders-Costs were imposed on the Department. [S 156, 270A, Art. 226, 265]

Shree Sarkhej Kelavani Mandal v. ADCIT (2025) 345 CTR 807 / 252 DTR 222 (Guj)(HC)