IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 24.01.2026

By | January 28, 2026
0 Comment

 IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 24.01.2026

Relevant ActSectionCase Law TitleBrief SummaryCitation
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 6Sanjay Bhaskar v. DCIT[Stay in India] For determining residential status, the day of arrival in India is to be excluded when computing the total number of days of stay.Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 12ABRajah Annamalaipuram Temple Trust v. PCIT[Portal Glitch Protection] A trust’s right to regular registration (5 years) cannot be defeated by technical limitations of the IT portal (e.g., restricted drop-down options). Authorities must process applications based on legal entitlement.Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 28(iv)AMD India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT[Free Assets for Testing] Fixed assets received free of cost from a holding company solely for testing purposes (without claiming depreciation) do not constitute a taxable benefit/perquisite under Section 28(iv).Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 37(1)ICICI Securities Ltd. v. PCIT[Penalties vs compensatory charges] Charges paid for operational lapses under SEBI/Stock Exchange regulations are compensatory, not “penalties for violation of law.” Hence, they are deductible business expenses.Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 50CVanraj Ranchhoddas Merchant v. ITO[Life Interest Assignment] Assigning a limited “life interest” in a trust property is not a transfer of land or building. Therefore, the deeming fiction of Section 50C (Stamp Duty Value) cannot be applied.Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 80GICICI Securities Ltd. v. PCIT[CSR & 80G] Disallowing an expense as CSR under Section 37(1) does not create a bar on claiming it as a deduction under Section 80G, provided statutory conditions of the donation are met.Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 92C (TP)ACIT v. Cargil India (P.) Ltd.[CUP Method] For sugar imports (CIF), the CUP Method was correctly applied by converting CIF to FOB and using an average of NYBOT and Kingsman prices with a ±5% range.Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 92C (TP)AMD India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT[Turnover Filter] Companies with turnovers 22 to 37 times higher than the assessee (and possessing high brand value) are not comparable to a captive software development service provider.Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 115BBEJagathesh v. ACIT[Retroactive Rate Bar] The enhanced 60% tax rate under Section 115BBE is applicable only from AY 2018-19. It cannot be applied to unexplained money additions for AY 2017-18.Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 144CSun Pharmaceutical Industries v. DCIT[DRP is Mandatory] Even if an assessment is set aside u/s 263 for a de novo frame, the AO must follow the draft assessment order (DRP) procedure u/s 144C for cases involving TP adjustments.Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961Section 199Ajay Kumar Goel v. DCIT[TDS Recovery Protection] If an employer deducts TDS from salary but fails to deposit it, the Revenue cannot raise a demand against the employee. Recovery must be made from the employer.Click Here

For More :- Read  IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 23.01.2026