IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 13.10.2025
| Section | Case Law Title | Brief Summary | Citation | Relevant Act |
| 69, 69A, 69B | Hiralal Vijawat vs. ACIT/DCIT | Entire income surrendered during a survey by a cloth and saree trader, asserting it arose from business (excess cash/stock, debtor cash, shop investment), was to be taxed as business income at normal rates, not as unexplained investments. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| 80-IA(4) | Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Gateway Distriparks Ltd. | Section 80-IA deduction must be allowed to an assessee operating a Container Freight Station (CFS) in the current year if the facts are similar to a prior year where the CIT(A) had approved the deduction. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| Set-off of Losses | Kamal Kant vs. Income-tax Officer | Business loss from trading in shares and securities can be set off against capital gains from land and building transactions, provided the return of income was filed within the prescribed time. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| 115BAA, 139(5) | Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Lahari Holiday Homes (P.) Ltd. | A revised return filed under section 139(5) opting for the concessional tax regime under section 115BAA substitutes the original return filed under normal provisions and is considered valid. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| 92C(3) | Titan Company Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, LTU-2 | A Transfer Pricing (TP) adjustment is not sustainable if the TPO fails to point out specific defects in the TP documentation as required under section 92C(3) before making the adjustment. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| General Income Principles | Dinesh Kumar Tak vs. Income Tax Officer | Unrealised gain on the valuation of unsold shares (difference between MTM/Global Report profit and return profit) cannot be taxed in the hands of the assessee. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| 149, 150(2) | Shubh Buildcon vs. Income-tax Officer | Reopening of assessment based on directions from CIT(A) is barred by section 150(2) if the time limit under section 149 for issuing notice had already expired when the appellate order was passed. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| 56(2)(x)(b)(B) | Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Deluxe Recycling India (P.) Ltd. | Where the difference between the stamp duty value and the actual purchase consideration was less than the prescribed limit of 10% under section 56(2)(x)(b)(B), no addition could be made (Case was also remanded to verify possession for depreciation claim). | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| 43CA(1) | Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Gaurav Investments | The 10% tolerance band in the proviso to section 43CA(1), introduced by FA 2020 (effective 1-4-2021), is curative and applies retrospectively to AY 2018-19. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| 11UA | Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax vs. JUS Scriptum Magnus (P). Ltd | Once an assessee validly adopts the Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method for share valuation under Rule 11UA, the AO cannot substitute it with the Net Asset Value (NAV) method or compare projections with actual figures. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| 12A | International Resources for Fairer Trade vs. Union of India | Delay in e-verifying Form 10B by a charitable trust was condoned due to an accountant’s oversight, as refusal would cause undue hardship and deny eligible exemption. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| General Assessment Principles | Krishna Enterprise vs. Income-tax Officer | Assessment in the name of a dissolved partnership firm was not jurisdictionally defective where the firm failed to inform the AO of the dissolution and continued operations under its existing PAN and bank accounts. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| 148A, 149 | Healing Touch Hospital vs. Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax | Sanction granted by the PCIT for issuing a reassessment notice within the time limit prescribed by section 149 was valid, and the assessee could not contend the order was barred by limitation if a personal hearing was provided within one month. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| Appeals | SPS Automobiles vs. Income-tax Officer | Delay in filing an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) was condoned when it was due to the default/oversight of the appointed lawyer and staff who misplaced the order. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| 50, 112, 263 | Tata Communications Ltd. vs. Pr. CIT | A Section 263 revision is invalid where the AO accepted the Section 112 tax rate for long-term capital gains on depreciable assets, as the fiction in Section 50 (deeming them short-term) applies only for computation, not for determining the tax rate or asset classification. | Click Here | Income Tax Act, 1961 |
For More :- Read IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 09.10.2025