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. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Survey-Surrender of excess cash and unaccounted advances as professional income-Assessing Officer after due enquiry accepting claim-Revision held invalid. [S.69A 115BBE, 133A]
Renu Singla (Smt.) v. Pr. CIT (2025) 122 ITR 631 / 175 taxmann.com 304 (Chd.)(Trib.)
S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital introduced by partners-Burden to explain source lies on partners-Assessment of firm not erroneous-Cash deposits in bank-Cash sales recorded in books and accepted-Revision invalid-Audit objection-Internal audit information can form basis-Independent application of mind by Principal Commissioner sufficient-Unsecured loan-Issue not challenged by assessee-Matter restored to Assessing Officer.[S.68, 143(3)]
J M G Green Promoters and Developers v. Pr. CIT [2024] 164 taxmann.com 1018 / (2025) 122 ITR 426 (Chd.)(Trib.)
S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Appeal pending before Commissioner (Appeals)-Revision on issues not forming subject matter of appeal-Revision valid-Penalty initiated under wrong provision-Correction through revision permissible where assessment otherwise erroneous-Addition under section 68 taxed at normal rate instead of mandatory rate under section 115BBE-Revision valid. [S.68,115BBE, 250, 271AAC]
Vijay Kumar Patel v. Pr. CIT (2025) 122 ITR 436 (Raipur)(Trib.)
S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Delay of 449 days-Delay was condoned and matter remanded to the file of CIT A) to decide on merits. [S. 250]
Prampreet Kaur v. ITO (2025) 122 ITR 14 (Armritsar)(Trib)
S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Enhancement by Commissioner (Appeals)-Mandatory notice under section 251(2) not issued-Enhancement invalid-Company-Book profit-Recast financial statements-Adjustment not adjudicated-Matter remanded. [S. 115JB, 251 (2)]
Indian Railway Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2025) 122 ITR 161 / 175 taxmann.com 747 (Delhi)(Trib.)
S. 194C: Deduction at source-Contractors-Rent-Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges-Separate agreements-CAM charges not part of rent-Tax deductible under section 194C at 1% and not at 10% u/s 194I. [S. 194I, 201(1), 201(1A)]
Bose Corporation India (P.) Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (2025) 122 ITR 412 / 175 taxmann.com 586 (Delhi)(Trib.)
S. 153C: Assessment-Income of any other person-Search–Third-party search-Dumb document-Abbreviated entries without corroborative evidence-Addition deleted-Limitation-Satisfaction note received beyond permissible period-Assessment for assessment year 2015-16 without jurisdiction-Satisfaction note-Prima facie satisfaction sufficient for assumption of jurisdiction-Delay of 16 days-Sufficient cause-Delay condoned.[S. 132(4), 153A, 292C]
Dy. CIT v. Karuppagounder Palaniswami (2025) 122 ITR 380 (Chennai)(Trib.)
S. 153A: Assessment-Search-No incriminating material found during search of assessee-Material seized from third party cannot form basis of assessment under section 153A-Assessment invalid-Return filed in response to notice-Revised computation during assessment-Addition based on difference from original return-Not justified-Undisclosed income-Sale of plots-Transactions duly recorded in books-No evidence of suppression-Addition deleted-Unexplained expenditure-Development expenses-Assessee only landowner-Expenditure incurred by associates-Addition deleted-Cash credits-Sale proceeds of plots deposited in bank-Source explained-Enhancement of profit by Commissioner (Appeals) deleted-Inter-bank transfer-Amount taxed twice as unexplained credit-Addition deleted-Cash credits-Documentary evidence explaining source-Addition restricted to profit element upheld. [S. 68, 69, 69C, 132, 139 153C]
Naval Kishore v. Dy. CIT (2025) 122 ITR 23 (Jaipur)(Trib.)
S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Unexplained investment-Addition based solely on retracted statement-No corroborative evidence-Addition deleted-Rental income-Seized rental agreement-Income already offered to tax-Addition deleted-Unexplained investment-Cost of construction-Addition based only on retracted confession-No supporting evidence-Addition deleted.[S. 69, 132(4), 153D]
Harish Jain v. Asst. CIT (2025) 122 ITR 640 / 174 taxmann.com 348 (Jaipur)(Trib.)
S. 149: Reassessment-Time limit for notice-Notices under new regime issued beyond limitation prescribed by Supreme Court-Proceedings time-barred-Withdrawal of approval under section 10(23C)(vi) invalid-Second proviso-Applicable only from assessment year 2022-23-Reference to Principal Commissioner for earlier years invalid-Withdrawal of approval-Jurisdiction-Reference made to wrong authority-Order without jurisdiction.[S 10(23C)(vi) 148, 148A(b), 148A(d)]
G. D. Mother Educational Society v. Pr. CIT (2025) 122 ITR 231 (Pat.)(Trib.)