IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 16.03.2026
| Relevant Act | Section | Case Law Title / Authority | Brief Summary | Citation |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 9 | Refinitiv US LLC v. ITO | Electronic matching solutions supplied by a US company to an Indian group entity are not taxable in India under the India-US DTAA (Article 12); entitled to a NIL-rate certificate. | [2026] 184 taxmann.com 167 (Delhi) |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 11 & 12A | Cartrade Foundation v. CIT(E) | Delay in regularizing provisional registration (Form 10AB) due to administrative oversight is condonable if reasonable cause is shown. | [2026] 184 taxmann.com 159 (Mum-Trib) |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 11 | Rotary Club of Bombay Queens Necklace v. ITO | Exemption cannot be denied for a minor delay in filing Form 10B (Audit Report) caused by the late release of the tax utility, provided it was available during processing. | [2026] 184 taxmann.com 168 (Mum-Trib) |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 37(1) | DCIT v. F A Construction | Ad hoc disallowances (e.g., 5%) are unsustainable if the AO has not identified specific defects in the books or vouchers produced by the firm. | [2026] 183 taxmann.com 760 (Mum-Trib) |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 54 | Mridula Agarwal v. ITO | Exemption for reinvesting LTCG is allowable for investment in more than one residential house (for the relevant year) even if made beyond the ITR due date. | [2026] 184 taxmann.com 155 (Del-Trib) |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 54F | Siddharth Bhaskar Shah v. PCIT | Reinvesting in six adjacent flats already adjudged as one unit in prior years cannot be challenged via Section 263 revision; the AO’s view was reasoned. | [2026] 184 taxmann.com 92 (Mum-Trib) |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 69A | DCIT v. F A Construction | Cash withdrawals from disclosed bank accounts for business use cannot be treated as unexplained money just because the AO doubts the utilization. | [2026] 183 taxmann.com 760 (Mum-Trib) Double |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 92C | Home Credit India Finance v. DCIT | For benchmarking NCD interest, Internal CUP (Comparable Uncontrolled Price) should be the Most Appropriate Method (MAM) if similar transactions exist. | [2026] 184 taxmann.com 64 (Del-Trib) |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 148 | Nezone Tubes Ltd. v. DCIT | Reopening notice for AY 2015-16 issued on 30-07-2022 is time-barred; the benefit of TOLA (extension act) does not apply after 31-03-2022. | [2026] 183 taxmann.com 766 (Kol-Trib) |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 234B | Punjab State Co-Op Supply v. CCIT | Interest waiver is justified for PSUs where tax defaults occurred due to lack of legal clarity (unsettled by SC and later retrospective amendments). | [2026] 184 taxmann.com 149 (P&H) |
| Income Tax Act | Sec 271D | Ravi Rishi Educational Society v. DCIT | Penalty for cash receipt (Sec 269SS) is unsustainable if the AO failed to record satisfaction for initiating penalty in the original assessment order. | [2026] 184 taxmann.com 15 (Hyd-Trib) |
For More ;- Read IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 13.03.2026