IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 20.03.2026

Relevant Act	Section	Case Law Title / Authority	Brief Summary	Citation
Income Tax Act	Sec 2(1A)	B.M. Govardhana Murthy v. DCIT	Agricultural income cannot be treated as “Other Sources” if ownership is undisputed and the income was accepted in prior years, even if old documents are missing.	Click Here
Income Tax Act	Sec 12AB	Chamber of Tax Consultants v. CIT(E)	Major Ruling: Registration renewal cannot be denied because a trust deed lacks an “irrevocability” clause if the state law (MPT Act) already makes the trust irrevocable.	Click Here
Income Tax Act	Sec 32	Wheels India Ltd. v. ACIT	Assessees are entitled to claim the remaining 50% additional depreciation in the subsequent year if the machinery was used for <180 days in the year of acquisition.	Click Here
Income Tax Act	Sec 36(1)(vii)	Ipfonline Ltd. v. DCIT	To claim a Bad Debt deduction, a mere write-off in the books of accounts is sufficient; the assessee is not required to prove the debt is actually irrecoverable.	Click Here
Income Tax Act	Sec 43CA	Mukesh Vasantkumar Chandan v. ITO	If a developer adopts Stamp Duty Value as turnover under Sec 44AD, a separate addition of the same differential under Sec 43CA is prohibited double taxation.	Click Here
Income Tax Act	Sec 48	Zarah Rafique Malik v. ITO	Expenses incurred for an OFS (Offer for Sale) in an IPO, proportionate to the promoter’s shareholding, are deductible as “cost of transfer” while computing capital gains.	Click Here
Income Tax Act	Sec 54F	Romaben Keyur Thakore v. DCIT	Sec 54F does not require construction to start after the sale of the asset. Payments made to a builder before the transfer are eligible for exemption.	Click Here
Income Tax Act	Sec 68	Bharat Kumar Gadodia v. ACIT	Share sale proceeds are genuine if backed by demat/bank statements and BSE records; Revenue cannot make additions without evidence of price manipulation.	Click Here
Income Tax Act	Sec 92C	ACIT v. Aegis Ltd.	The TPO cannot re-characterize an Investment in Preference Shares as a “Loan” to impute notional interest without evidence of a sham transaction.	Click Here
Income Tax Act	Sec 147	Gulbrandsen (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT	Reopening an assessment on the same material already examined (and where a final order was missed due to limitation) is an invalid “change of opinion.”	Click Here

For More :- Read IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 19.03.2026