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-With in four years-Value of any benefit or perquisites-On the basis of observation by the CIT (A)-Repayment of loan-Disputed facts cannot be adjudicated in writ proceedings-Reassessment notice is held to be valid. [S. 28(iv), 148, 151, Art. 226]

K. Rajesh v. ACIT (2021) 283 Taxman 153 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147: Reassessment-Within four years-Issue of share expenses-Reassessment notice was held to be valid. [S. 148, Art. 226]

Financial Software & Systems (P) Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2021) 283 Taxman 165 /(2022) 218 DTR 497/ 329 CTR 44/ 447 ITR 352 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-Cash credit-Purchases-Non genuine payment-Reassessment notice was held to be valid. [S. 68, 148, Art. 226]

Chennai Network Infrastructure Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 283 Taxman 126 / (2022) 441 ITR 535 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Failure to deduct tax at source-Reassessment notice was held to be justified [S. 40(a)(i), Art. 226]

BASF Catalysts India (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 283 Taxman 591 (Mad.) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Audit objection-Survey-Reassessment notice was held to be valid. [S. 133A, 148, Art. 226]

Sutherland Global Services (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 208 DTR 265 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-With in four years-Change of opinion-Interest income-oversight, inadvertence or mistake committed by the ITO-No fresh material-Reassessment is held to be not valid. [S. 57, 148]

CIT v. Bharatiya Reserve Bank Note Mudran (P) Ltd. (2021) 207 DTR 283/(2022) 324 CTR 311 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-No failure to disclose material facts- Capital gains -Business income -Change of opinion-The Assessing Officer has to deal with objections if not satisfied should specifically state as to how the objections are unjustified-Reassessment notice was quashed. [S. 45, 148, Art. 226]

Saravana Stocks Investments (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 323 CTR 666 / 207 DTR 185 ( 2022) / 449 ITR 594(Mad.)(HC)Editorial: Decision of single judge , set aside , Saravana Stocks Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2022)449 ITR 589 (Mad)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Income from forex Transaction, Insurance claim, miscellaneous income-Not eligible deduction-Reassessment notice was held to be valid. [S. 80HHC, 148, Art. 226]

Super Spinning Mills Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 283 Taxman 55 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Unexplained investment-Purchase of house-Payment was made prior to sale existing house-Not examined the source of investment in new house-Reassessment notice was held to be justified. [S. 54, 59, 148, Art. 226]

N.S. Srinivasan v. CIT (2021) 283 Taxman 118 /( 2022) 440 ITR 367/ 211 DTR 327/ 325 CTR 521 (Mad.) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Method of accounting-Professional income-Notice issued on the basis of statement of a manger (Operations)-Re assessment notice is held to be justified. [S. 145, 148, Art. 226]

Dr. Sajan Hedge v. ACIT (2021) 283 Taxman 144/ (2022) 440 ITR 389 (Mad.)(HC)