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. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Repair and maintenance services of aircraft equipment to Indian airline operators-Services did not involve any transfer of technology, know or skill-Receipts are not taxable as FTS-DTAA-India-USA [Art. 12(4)]
CIT (IT) v. Goodrich Corporation (2025) 305 Taxman 518 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Global online learning platform-Online courses and degrees from universities, companies-Receipts are not taxable as fees for included services (FIS)-DTAA-India-USA.[Art. 12]
CIT (IT) v. Coursera Inc (2025) 305 Taxman 269 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Payments made to non-resident telecom operators-Telecommunication service provider, for providing interconnect services and transfer of capacity in foreign countries-Not chargeable to tax as royalty-Not liable to deduct tax at source-SLP of revenue dismissed-OECD Model Convention, Art 12. [S.195]
CIT (IT) v. Communication Global Network Services Ltd.(2025) 305 Taxman 559 (SC) Editorial : CIT (IT) v. Communication Global Network Services Ltd.(2025) 175 taxmann.com 745 (Karn)(HC)
S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Non-refundable one time life membership fee received by club from members-Capital receipt.[S.28(i)]
Chennai Corporate Club (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 305 Taxman 433 (Mad)(HC).
S. 2(14)(iii) : Capital asset-Agricultural land-adventure in nature of trade-Capital gains-Business income. [S. 10(37), 28(i), 45, 260A]
CIT v. Pandit Vettrivel (2025) 305 Taxman 645 (Mad)(HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –
Capital gains – Business income from share transactions – Principle of consistency to be followed – Once similar income was accepted as capital gains in earlier and subsequent years, same cannot be assessed as business income in the year under consideration merely on the basis of earlier adverse view- Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order is affirmed . [ S. 10(38 ) 45 ,68 , 94(7) 111A, 260A ]
PCIT v. Sarah Faisal Hawa (Bom)(HC) www.itatonline.org .
S. 147 Reassessment – With in four years- Change of opinion –Survey – Penny stock – Alleged bogus business loss – AO had specifically examined the assessee’s loss in shares of Shree Nath Commercial and Finance Ltd- Reopening was subsequently based on the very same survey material, Kolkata Investigation Wing report on penny stocks, and the same disclosed transactions, the reopening was invalid as being founded merely on a change of opinion – Notice u/s 148 and reassessment quashed . [S. 14A, 133A, 143(2), 142(1), 143(3), 148]
K.A. Investments Consultancy LLP v. ITO (Mum)(Trib) www.itatonline.org .
S.54F : Capital gains- Investment in a residential house – Tenancy rights – Redevelopment –Income from other sources – Flat received on surrender of tenancy rights – Not taxable u/s 56(2)(x) – Exemption u/s 54F allowable. [S. 2(14), 2(47), 45 , 56(2)(x)]
ITO v. Varun Jaisingh Asher (Mum.)(Trib.) www.itatonline.org.
S. 50 : Capital gains – Depreciable assets – Block of assets -Rate of tax – Rate of tax of would be in terms of section 112 at rate of 20 per cent- Writ petition against order of ITAT Special Bench , SKF India Ltd v. Dy.CIT (2025) 210 ITD 1 / 121 ITR 307 (SB) ( Mum)( Trib) – Alternative remedy – Interpretation of sections 50 and 112 – Writ petition dismissed leaving merits of controversy open. [ S. 2(11), 32 ,50, 112 , 260A , Art. 226 ]
PCIT v. SKF India Ltd. (Bom.)(HC) www.itatonlinee.org .
Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024
S. 91 : Filing of declaration and particulars to be furnished -Appeal disposed as withdrawn-Liberty to assessee to approach authority for purpose of availing benefits under the scheme.[S.91(2). 91(3),Art. 136]
Electrex (India) Ltd. v. CIT (2025) 304 Taxman 188 (SC)