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.234E: Fee – Default in furnishing the statements – Provision for levy of late fee for delay in filing — Valid — Intimation calling for payment of late fee for delaying filing of return — Not sustainable for periods prior to June 1, 2015 [S. 200A, Art , 226 ]

Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. UOI (2022) 440 ITR 26/210 DTR 145/ 324 CTR 616 (Ker) (HC)

S. 151 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Sanction for issue of notice – Recording of separate reasons not necessary – Reassessment notice is held to be valid . [ S. 147, 148 , Art , 226 ]

Premlata Soni ( Smt.) v . NEAC (2022) 440 ITR 578 (MP) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years- Where the necessary details were disclosed, reopening is not valid. [ S. 148, Art , 226 ]

JRS Pharma and Gujarat Microwax Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2022) 440 ITR 557 (Guj) ( HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years- Where the necessary details were disclosed, reopening is not valid. [ S. 54, 148, Art , 226 ]

Bankim Bhagwanji Chaauhan v. ITO (2022) 440 ITR 485 (Guj) ( HC) Bankim Bhagwanji Chaauhan v. ITO (2022) 440 ITR 485 (Guj) ( HC)

S.147: Reassessment – Two assessment years reopened – One with in four years – One after the expiry of four years – Condition Precedent — Primary facts necessary for assessment fully and truly disclosed — AO had applied his mind – Not open for the AO to reopen assessment based on very same material and to take a different view – Notices for reopening on change of opinion – Invalid [S. 148, Art , 226 ]

Rich Feel Health and Beauty Private Limited v. ITO (2022) 440 ITR 41/ 284 Taxman 286 (Bom) ( HC)/Editorial: SLP of Revenue dismissed , ITO v. Rich Feel Health & Beauty (P.) Ltd (2023) 291 Taxman 203 (SC)

S.147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Condition Precedent — Notice not specifying failure to disclose any material facts truly and fully by assessee — Notice and subsequent order invalid. [S. 148, Art , 226 ]

Coca-Cola India P. Ltd. v. DCIT (2022) 440 ITR 20 (Bom) ( HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment – Contention of denial of opportunity of personal hearing requested by Assessee — Assessment order stayed.[ Art , 226 ]

Inder Prasad Mathura Lal v. NEAC (2022) 440 ITR 73 (Raj) ( HC) Inder Prasad Mathura Lal v. NEAC (2022) 440 ITR 73 (Raj) ( HC)

144B: Faceless Assessment –Mandatory condition – Assessment order passed without passing the draft assessment order – Assessing Officer was directed to pass a fresh order , after complying with requirement of section 144B .[ S. 143 (3), Art , 226 ]

Sribasta Kumar Swain v .UOI (2022) 440 ITR 545 (Orissa) (HC) Sribasta Kumar Swain v .UOI (2022) 440 ITR 545 (Orissa) (HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment –Show cause notice granting time of only four days – Assessment order passed in violation of principles of natural justice to be set aside. [ Art , 226 ] S. 143(3) : Assessment –Show cause notice granting time of only four days – Assessment order passed in violation of principles of natural justice to be set aside. [ Art , 226 ]

Deepak Garg v. UOI (2022) 440 ITR 575 (Delhi) ( HC )Deepak Garg v. UOI (2022) 440 ITR 575 (Delhi) ( HC )

S. 127 : Power to transfer cases – Assigning of reasons in notice — Search proceedings showing that assessee residing in Nagaland and had financial interests in Kerala — Transfer for purposes of co-ordinated investigation — Cogent and credible reasons assigned in notice — Notice sent to registered office in Kerala and received by Assessee — Order for transfer valid .[S. 132, ITR 127, Art, 226 ]

Varun Raj Pillai v. PCIT (2022) 440 ITR 47 / 211 DTR 45/ (2022) 325 CTR 45/285 Taxman 242(Gauhati )( HC)/Rajendra Pillai .M.K. v.PCIT ( 2022) 2022) 440 ITR 47 / 211 DTR 45/ 325 CTR 45/285 Taxman 242 (Gauhati )( HC)/Valsala Raj Pillai (Smt) v.PCIT ( 2022) 2022) 440 ITR 47 / 211 DTR 45/ 325 CTR 45/285 Taxman 242 (Gauhati )( HC) Editorial : Decision of single judge in M.K. Rajendran Pillai v. PCIT ( 2020) 421 ITR 274 ( Gauhati ) (HC) is affirmed .