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S. 147 : Reassessment-Unexplained money-Rotation of undisclosed income-FIR filed by CBI-Writ petition was withdrawn. [S. 69A, 148, Art. 226]

Satva Merchandize (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 284 Taxman 336 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Foreign currency loan-Guarantee interest-Material available was not taken in to consideration in original assessment proceedings-Re assessment notice was held to be valid. [S. 148, 195, Art. 226]

Cairn India v. Dy. DIT(IT) (2022) 284 Taxman 68 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Income from other sources-Valuation of shares-Order of single judge allowing the writ petition is affirmed. [S. 56(2)(viib), 148, Art. 226]

ITO v. Shivsu Canadian Clear Waters Ltd. (2022) 284 Taxman 660/ 214 DTR 254/ 327 CTR 345 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Investment in residential house-All documents pertaining to three properties were furnished in the course of original assessment proceedings-Reassessment notice was quashed. [S. 54F, 148, Art. 226]

Janaki Mohan v. ITO (2022) 284 Taxman 148 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Alleged excess deduction-Basis of information and material already on record-Re assessment notice was quashed. [S. 80IB, 80IC, Art. 226]

Marico Ltd v. ACIT (2021) 133 taxmann.com 121 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed; ACIT v. Marico Ltd. (2022) 284 Taxman 365 (SC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Order passed without awaiting directions of DRP under section 144C(5) of the Act-Order was set aside [S. 143(3), Art, 226]

Ford India (P) Ltd v. ITO (2022) 284 Taxman 396 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Order passed without waiting for expiry of time period provided-Order was quashed-Directed to pass a fresh assessment. [S. 144B(1) (xvi)(b), Art. 226]

Clarks Future Footwear Centre v. NFAC (2022) 284 Taxman 676 (Delhi)(HC).

S. 144B : Faceless assessment-Personal hearing-Series of adjournments were granted on prayer of petitioner from time-to-time and petitioner did not comply with many notices-Petition was dismissed. [Art. 226]

Unisource Hydro Carbon Services (P.) Ltd. v. UOI (2022) 284 Taxman 21 (Cal) (HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Opportunity of hearing-Violation of principle of natural justice-Order was set aside-Directed to pass reasoned order in accordance with law. [S. 144B(7), Art. 226]

Sudev Industries Ltd. v. NFAC (2022) 284 Taxman 214 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Personal hearing-Opportunity of personal hearing was not provided-Order was set aside and remanded to Assessing Officer for adjudication afresh. [S. 144B(7), Art. 226]

Devanshu Infin Ltd. v. NEAC (2022) 284 Taxman 36 (Delhi)(HC)