INCOME TAX CASE LAW DIGEST 10.6.2026
INCOME TAX CASE LAW DIGEST 10.6.2026
| Case Law Title | Case Citation | Section(s) Involved | Relevant Act | Brief Summary |
| Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-9 vs. Nikunj Dhanuka | Click Here | Section 147 / 148, Section 10(38) | Income-tax Act, 1961 | SLP dismissed. Reopening of assessment based on Investigation Wing info regarding bogus LTCG exemption was invalid, as records factually proved the assessee never made any LTCG in the specified company’s shares. |
| VRG Electronics (P.) Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax Delhi 7 | Click Here | Section 115BAA, CBDT Circular No. 17/2024 | Income-tax Act, 1961 | Matter Remanded. Rejection of condonation for delayed filing of Form 10IC (due to accountant’s error) was unjustified. CBDT Circular No.17/2024 applies to all assessment years unless specified otherwise; PCIT must reconsider the genuine hardship. |
| Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Mohan Breweries & Distilleries Ltd. | Click Here | Section 115JA | Income-tax Act, 1961 | Decided against Assessee. A provision made for bad and doubtful debts represents a provision for the diminution in the value of assets. Therefore, it must be added back while computing book profits under Section 115JA. (Note: The title text provided for case [3] in the prompt mentioned Sec 80IA, but the official summary detailed Sec 115JA). |
| Director of Income-tax (Exemptions) vs. Institute of Chartered Shipbrokers | Click Here | Section 12AA, Section 2(15) | Income-tax Act, 1961 | Matter Remanded. Cancellation of charitable registration post-amendment to Sec 2(15) needs fresh review by the DIT (Exemption) in light of the Apex Court’s ruling in Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority. |
| Pathan Wajeed Khan Manzoor vs. Income-tax Officer, NFAC | Click Here | Section 69A | Income-tax Act, 1961 | Matter Remanded. Where the department treated ₹1.28 crores in bank deposits as unexplained money, the matter was restored for fresh review to maintain consistency, as an 8% net profit on scrap turnover was accepted in both preceding and succeeding years. |
| B J Fernandez vs. Income-tax Officer | Click Here | Section 54EC | Income-tax Act, 1961 | Matter Remanded. Remanded to the AO to verify the assessee’s claim that the second-round investment in specified bonds exceeded the 6-month deadline solely due to the non-availability of REC bonds for subscription. |
| Income-tax Officer vs. Kanha Grain Process | Click Here | Section 148 | Income-tax Act, 1961 & TOLA | Decided in favor of Assessee. A Section 148 notice issued for AY 2015-16 on or after 01-04-2021 was quashed as it was time-barred and did not fall within the completion windows permitted under the TOLA framework. |
| Chandigarh Educational Society vs. DCIT/ACIT | Click Here | Section 80G, Section 12AB | Income-tax Act, 1961 | Matter Remanded. Rejection of Sec 80G approval solely based on a prior denial of Sec 12AB registration cannot hold once the Tribunal has already directed the grant of Sec 12AB registration in earlier proceedings. |
| Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Karnataka Bank Ltd. | Click Here | Appellate Procedure | Income-tax Act, 1961 | SLP dismissed. The Revenue cannot raise a fresh issue regarding the “netting of appreciation” of an investment portfolio before the High Court if it was never urged or raised before the ITAT. |
| Sohanlal Sewaram Jaggi (HUF) vs. Income-tax Officer | Click Here | Section 2(14)(iii) | Income-tax Act, 1961 | Decided in favor of Assessee. Land situated 17–18 km outside municipal limits, classified as agricultural in revenue records, and surrounded by farms is not a “capital asset”. The mere absence of active agricultural income/operations does not change its character. |
| AKC Retailers (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT/ACIT | Click Here | Section 147 / 148 | Income-tax Act, 1961 | Decided in favor of Assessee. Reassessment additions made on issues completely outside the recorded reasons for reopening (share application money from different entities instead of the recorded unsecured loans) are unsustainable. |
| Mukesh Agarwal vs. ACIT | Click Here | Section 115BBE, IDS 2016 | Income-tax Act, 1961 | Decided in favor of Assessee. Section 115BBE cannot be retrospectively applied to tax a surrendered survey investment (disclosed under IDS 2016) as an unexplained investment when the amount was already recorded properly in audited books. |
Read more
for more refer income tax Department website click here
for more refer YouTube Subscribe website click here