IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 11.12.2025

Relevant Act	Section	Case Law Title	Brief Summary	Citation
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 10(23G)	Tata Industries Ltd. v. ACIT	Assessee infrastructure capital company qualifies for exemption under section 10(23G) by investing in shares of an enterprise engaged in the business of infrastructure facility.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 14A	Tata Industries Ltd. v. ACIT	Disallowance under section 14A (expenditure related to exempt income) cannot exceed the amount of exempt income earned by the assessee during the year.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 40(a)(ii)	Tata Industries Ltd. v. ACIT	Overseas taxes not eligible for relief under Section 90 or 91 do not fall under the purview of section 40(a)(ii) (disallowing taxes paid on profits).	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 54F	Ameetsingh Ajitsingh Rajpal v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax	Matter remanded to AO for fresh adjudication as the assessee sought to admit additional evidence supporting the $\text{S. 54F}$ claim (exemption on investment in residential house) that requires verification.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 68	Marigold Merchandise (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax	Reassessment initiated after four years solely based on Investigation Wing’s information, without independent analysis or allegation of assessee’s non-disclosure, was based on borrowed satisfaction and held invalid.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 68	Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Central v. Naveen Infradevelopers & Engineers (P.) Ltd.	Additions made in reassessment on issues unrelated to the original recorded reasons for reopening (discrepancy between turnover and bank credits) and where no addition was made on the original ground, could not be sustained.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 69	Babubhai Ramanbhai Patel v. Income-tax Officer	Cash deposits in a small kirana trader’s bank account, which broadly matched recorded daily sales and were supported by basic books, cannot be treated as unexplained investment merely due to technical deficiencies.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 69A	Reva Enterprises v. Income-tax Officer	Assessee-firm failed to file return and could not explain the nature and source of cash and credit entries in its bank account; addition as undisclosed/unexplained income under section 69A was upheld.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 69A	Sudhir Babu Chalasani v. Income-tax Officer	Addition was deleted where the assessee proved the genuineness of purchase and sale of shares through stock exchange (contract notes, bank payments) as an ordinary investor.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 80G	Nyati Builders (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax	Deduction claimed under section 80G on account of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) expenses was allowed.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 115BBE	Reva Enterprises v. Income-tax Officer	The amended provision of section 115BBE (increasing tax rate on $\text{S. 68}$ income from 30% to 60%) is not applicable retrospectively (i.e., not applicable before 1-4-2017).	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 143	V Hotels Ltd. v. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi	Post-approval notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were unsustainable as all pre-approval statutory dues and claims stood extinguished once the NCLT approved the Resolution Plan under the IBC.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 144	Satya Enterprises v. Income-tax Officer	Best Judgment Assessment under $\text{S. 144}$ completed without issuing the mandatory notice under section 143(2) was vitiated and quashed as void ab initio.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 147	Haseeb Mohammed Iqbal Shaikh v. Income-tax Officer(International Taxation)	Reopening notice under $\text{S. 148A(b)}$ issued by the wrong jurisdictional officer (ITO, Ward-1(1), Thane, instead of ITO (International Taxation)) was held to be without jurisdiction.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 149	Hitesh Ramniklal Shah v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax	Notice under $\text{S. 148}$ issued on 27-7-2022 for AY 2014-15 was time-barred, as the computation of limitation under $\text{S. 149}$ (considering exclusions) showed the surviving period had expired on 27-6-2022.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 151	Paresh Hiralal Shah v. Income-tax Officer	Notice under $\text{S. 148}$ issued beyond three years with sanction from the Principal Commissioner instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner (the Competent Authority) was void ab initio.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 250	Coper Co-operative Sugar Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer	Appeal dismissed ex parte by Commissioner (Appeals) for non-prosecution was remanded for fresh adjudication to provide the assessee another opportunity of hearing based on principles of natural justice.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 271AAC	Reva Enterprises v. Income-tax Officer	Where addition under $\text{S. 69A}$ was upheld and taxed under $\text{S. 115BBE}$ , the penalty under section 271AAC(1) (for undisclosed income) was consequential and leviable.	Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961	Section 271F	Reva Enterprises v. Income-tax Officer	Where the assessee-firm had taxable income and no reasonable cause for not filing the return, the penalty under section 271F (for failure to furnish a return) was upheld.	Click Here

For More :- Read IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 10.12.2025