INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 28.10.2026
Here is the requested case law information organized in a structured table format:
| Section | Case Law Title | Citation | Brief Summary | Relevant Act |
| Section 2(42A) | Venkataswaroop Reddy Siddavarapu v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax | Click here | Where shares were received via gift and fair market value was offered to tax under Sec 56(2)(x), the holding period of the previous owner must be included under Sec 49(1)(ii) and Explanation 1(b) to Sec 2(42A); resultant gain is taxable as long-term capital gain. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 2(47) | Chennakesavan Savithri v. ITO, International Taxation | Click Here | Reopening under Sec 148 was bad in law as an unregistered JDA had no legal efficacy under Sec 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and mere execution of Power of Attorney does not constitute a property transfer. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 11 | Burgess English Senior Secondary School v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax | Click here | Revision under Sec 263 was unjustified since the AO took a plausible view after proper inquiry, accepting the school’s claim for exemption as part of a parent charitable society with consolidated accounts. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 14A | Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Sunteck Realty Ltd. | Click here | For Rule 8D disallowance computation under Sec 14A, only investments that actually yielded exempt income during the relevant year should be considered. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 32 | Commissioner of Income-tax v. Indian Overseas Bank Accounts Department | Click here | Depreciation at the rate of 60% on UPS (Uninterruptible Power Supply) was allowable to the assessee. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 36(1)(vii) | South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax | Click here | A fresh/additional claim raised for the first time before appellate authority regarding NPA write-offs could not be considered at the appellate stage while examining the validity of the original disallowance. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 36(1)(vii) | South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax | Click here | Where the Tribunal failed to adjudicate the original disallowance of Rs. 14.10 crores for NPA bad debt on merits and only addressed an additional claim, the matter warranted a remand for proper adjudication. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 36(1)(viia) | Indian Bank v. Commissioner of Income-tax | Click here | Further deduction under provisos for RBI-classified doubtful/loss assets cannot be denied solely because deduction under the main clause was allowed; the option belongs to the assessee subject to statutory limits. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 37(1) | Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Sunteck Realty Ltd. | Click here | Decapitalised borrowing costs genuinely incurred by a developer remain allowable as revenue deduction under Sec 37(1), even if recognition methods changed under Ind AS 115 / Ind AS 23. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 43B | Commissioner of Income-tax v. Indian Overseas Bank Accounts Department | Click here | Provision made towards employee leave encashment without actual payment is not allowable under Sec 43B, as the section strictly requires actual payment. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 48 | Pranav Kirit Inamdar v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax | Click here | Interest paid on borrowed funds for acquiring Non-Convertible Debentures (NCDs) forms part of the actual cost of acquisition under Sec 48 upon sale. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 48 | Venkataswaroop Reddy Siddavarapu v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax | Click here | Indexation under Sec 48 for gifted shares taxed under Sec 56(2)(x) must be reckoned from the financial year in which the gift was taxed under Sec 56(2)(x), not when the previous owner acquired them. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 54G | HDP Hydraulics (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer | Click here | Sec 54G exemption granted under normal provisions cannot be denied while computing book profits under Sec 115JB merely due to return filing within extended time or omitted claims in the return. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 68 | ACIT v. Lupin Investment (P.) Ltd. | Click here | Reopening assessment based on appellate observations from another year without fresh tangible material constitutes impermissible review, and failure to follow Sec 148A procedure invalidates reassessment. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 69 | Pernod Ricard India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax | Click here | Reopening based on VAT return vs. books of account discrepancies can be examined during reassessment proceedings; court declined to interfere at the preliminary stage. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 69A | Pernod Ricard India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax | Click here | Invocation of the extended limitation period and Sec 148 notice was justified as the assessee failed to establish that disputed VAT returns relied upon had been disclosed to the AO previously. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 80G | Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Sunteck Realty Ltd. | Click here | Deduction under Sec 80G is allowable for qualifying donations added back under Explanation 2 to Sec 37(1), even if such donations discharged CSR obligations. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 80-IBA | Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Sunteck Realty Ltd. | Click here | Sec 80-IBA deduction for affordable housing cannot be denied for the entire project due to a single non-compliant unit; deduction is denied only proportionately for the non-compliant unit. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 115JB | Commissioner of Income-tax v. Indian Overseas Bank Accounts Department | Click here | Section 115JB (Minimum Alternate Tax) is not applicable to banking companies governed by the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 115JB | Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Sunteck Realty Ltd. | Click here | Disallowance computed under Sec 14A r.w. Rule 8D cannot be added to book profits under Sec 115JB where no direct expenditure relating to exempt income was debited to the profit and loss account. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 147 | ACIT v. Perlin Cosmeceuticals (P.) Ltd. | Click here | Failure by AO to dispose of reassessment objections with a speaking order before issuing notice under Sec 143(2) renders the reassessment proceedings unsustainable in law. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 148 | Pernod Ricard India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax | Click here | Sec 148A procedure was inapplicable for notices issued prior to 01-04-2021; rejection of objections on merits does not warrant interference if jurisdiction is valid. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 149 | Rita Kumari v. Assistant Commission of Income-tax | Click here | A reassessment notice issued beyond the permissible ten-year limitation period under Sec 149 is liable to be quashed. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 151 | Naveen Chandrakar v. Income-tax Officer | Click here | Order/notice under Sec 148 issued after 3 years without sanction from the specified authority as per Sec 151(ii) is bad in law and liable to be quashed. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 271AAB | Saif Health Remedies (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT | Click here | No penalty under Sec 271AAB is attracted where expenditure was recorded in books and search revealed no material proving false entries, as voluntary disclosure does not constitute undisclosed income. | Income-tax Act, 1961 |