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. 40A(2): Expenses or payments not deductible – Excessive or unreasonable -Stacking and handling expenses – Blending and screening charges to its sister concern – Order of Tribunal deleting the disallowance is affirmed .[ S. 260A ]

PCIT v. Ajit Ramakant Phatarpekar [2021] 277 Taxman 543 /[2020] 429 ITR 319 (Bom) (HC)

S.147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – No failure to disclose material facts – Year of taxability – Mercantile system of accounting –Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection is set aside . [ S.5, 145, 148 , Art. 226 ]

Chowgule & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. JCIT [2023] 147 taxmann.com 286 (Bom)( HC)

S.147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – No failure to disclose material facts – Year of taxability – Mercantile system of accounting –Reassessment notice and order disposing the objection is set aside . [ S.5, 145, 148 , Art. 226 ]

Chowgule & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. JCIT [2023] 147 taxmann.com 286 (Bom)( HC)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source -Non-resident – Income – Deemed to accrue or arise in India Demurrage paid – In terms of relevant sales contract – Income not accrued in India – Not liable to deduct tax at source .[ S. 5(2)(b) ,9(1)(i) ]

Sesa Goa Ltd. v. JCIT [2020] 117 taxmann.com 96 / 423 ITR 426 (Bom) ( HC)

S. 249 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Condonation of delay-Form of appeal and limitation-Delay of 11 days-Non availability of tax consultant-Delay is condoned-CIT(A) is directed to decide the issue on merits. [S.80P, 246A, 250, Art. 226

Meenachil Taluk Cooperative Employees Cooperative Society Ltd. CIT (Appeals)(2024) 300 Taxman 338 (Ker)(HC)

S. 35E : Deduction for expenditure on prospecting etc. for certain minerals- Capital or revenue – Amount paid to mining lessees is not towards acquisition of right to mine but was towards expenditure undertaken by said lessees for purpose of developments like roads and trenches, temporary huts, drilling, etc.- Allowable as deduction. [ S. 37(1)]

CIT, Karnataka v. Mukhtar Minerals (P.) Ltd.[2021] 276 Taxman 218/ 432 ITR 152 (Bom)( HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Procedure-Application-Unexplained investments-Search-Jewellery-Conclusion of Settlement Commission by accepting explanation in spirit of settlement could not be faulted calling for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction. [S. 115BBE, 132, 245D(4), 245I, Art. 226]

PCIT v. Umah Agarwal (Smt.) (2024) 300 Taxman 493 (Karn)(HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Limitation-Delay in passing order not due to assessee-Delay could be condoned-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 245D(4A), 245D(4A)(iii),245HA(1)(iv), Art. 136]

CIT (Central) v. RNS Infrastructure Ltd. (2024) 300 Taxman 101 (SC) Editorial : CIT (Central) v. RNS Infrastructure Ltd (2022) 286 Taxman 509/ 442 ITR 417 (Karn)(HC)

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Search and seizure-Suppression of sale-Abated on account of it not being true and full disclosure of unaccounted income on basis of volumetric report-Survey report-High Court also held that withdrawal of writ petition did not close any of rights of assessee to raise issue of illegality of survey report before Settlement Commission and, thus, by withdrawal of writ petition matter of challenge to volumetric measurement report could not become final-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S.132, 133A, 245C, 245D(4), Art. 136]

PCIT v. S.R. Ferro Alloys (2024) 300 Taxman 445 (SC) Editorial : S.R. Ferro Alloys v. ITSC (2017) 81 taxmann.com 481 (MP)(HC)

S. 234B : Interest-Advance tax-Application of seized or requisitioned assets-Seized cash can only be adjusted against tax liability of person from whom cash was seized and till date of framing of assessment of parties-Revenue had no authority to treat cash seized from possession of one person as cash belong to another person. [S.132(4), 132B(3),140A,153A, 260A]

Kamla Mehta v. CIT (2024) 300 Taxman 625/ 341 CTR 449/ 243 DTR 244 (P&H)(HC)