29 IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 04.03.2025

By | March 16, 2025

29 IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 04.03.2025

SectionCase Law TitleBrief SummaryCitationRelevant Act
2(15)Income-tax Officer (Exemption) v. St. John Ambulance AssociationMatter restored to Assessing Officer to determine if first aid training activities are charitable. 

Click Here

 

Income-tax Act, 1961
2(19AA)Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxTransfer of treasury unit assets without liabilities is a taxable capital gain, not a demerger.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
4Trends Pharma v. Income-tax Officer-24(3)(4)C-11Disallowing short-term capital loss from sham share transactions does not raise a substantial question of law.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
14AReckitt Benckiser Healthcare India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxNo further interest disallowance under 14A if assessee has sufficient interest-free funds.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
32Ammann India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-taxTribunal’s deletion of addition without dealing with merits is not valid information for reopening assessment.

Reopening Notice for Depreciation on Goodwill Quashed; No Escapement of Income

Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
36(1)(va)Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxLate deposit of employee contributions to PF/ESI is treated as assessee’s income.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
37(1)Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxProvisions for sales return based on scientific basis are allowable.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
37(1)Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxProduct registration expenses are capital expenditure.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
37(1)Jubilant Foodworks Ltd. v. DCITIssuance of shares at discount is allowable expenditure.

ESOP Discount Allowed as Business Expenditure Under Section 37(1)

Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
37(1)Indus Biotech Ltd. v. ACITExpenditure on abandoned IPO is revenue expenditure.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
40(a)(ia)Mahaonline Ltd. Directorate of Information Technology v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)Disallowance under 40(a)(ia) is unsustainable for payments to government and properly TDS compliant payments.

Section 40(a)(ia) Disallowance Quashed; Payments to Government and Unpaid Amounts Exempt from TDS

 

Click Here

 

Income-tax Act, 1961
44ADKety Medicare Centre v. ACIT CC-2, ThaneNursing home turnover should not include separately declared doctors’ fees.

Section 44AD Presumptive Taxation Applied to Nursing Home ; Partner’s Statement Not Sole Basis for Addition

Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
68Hari Enterprise v. Principal Commissioner of Income-taxRevision upheld for loan genuineness not examined by AO.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
68Hari Enterprise v. Principal Commissioner of Income-taxRevision justified for loan verification needed but not done by AO.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
68Kumar Suman Singh v. ACITGift addition upheld due to lack of disclosed source by donor. (Grandmother).Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
69AAwadh Kishor Singh v. National Faceless Assessment CentreAddition under 69A for unexplained cash deposits is valid if notices were served.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
69CKumar Suman Singh v. ACITAddition for unexplained household expenses sustained.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
80GTiger Research an Conservation Trust v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 ExemptionCancellation of 80G approval unjustified if FCRA funds are utilized as per statutory requirements.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
80-IAKesar Terminals & Infrastructure Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxCombined order of objections and assessment under 80-IA violates natural justice.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
80-ICReckitt Benckiser Healthcare India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax40(a)(ia) disallowance does not increase 80-IC deduction.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
80-ICReckitt Benckiser Healthcare India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxScrap income from manufacturing unit is eligible for 80-IC deduction.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
80-ICReckitt Benckiser Healthcare India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxProfit from entire manufacturing process, including sales, is eligible for 80-IC.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
143Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxNo specific auditor observation required for expenditure disallowance under 143(1).Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
145AHari Enterprise v. Principal Commissioner of Income-taxRevision order unjustified if assessee’s closing stock valuation explanation is not considered.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
148APratul Krishnakant Shroff v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxAO must grant time for reply if assessee requests adjournment under 148A(b).Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
SectionCase Law TitleBrief SummaryCitationRelevant Act
153AKumar Suman Singh v. ACIT153A proceedings valid based on valid information and undisclosed investments.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
154Vadodara Bharuch Tollway Ltd. v. Income-tax OfficerAssessee allowed to challenge rectification order and assessment order within 30 days.

Assessee Directed to Appeal Rectification Order Under Section 154

Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
194-IHari Enterprise v. Principal Commissioner of Income-taxRevision upheld for AO’s failure to verify TDS on rent under 194-I.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
194JHari Enterprise v. Principal Commissioner of Income-taxRevision unjustified as TDS under 194J was properly addressed by AO.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
269STBirmala Projects (P.) Ltd. v. Ashwani AhluwaliaMere cash receipt violating 269ST does not void underlying agreement in civil court.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961

Related post

IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 03.03.2025