IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 29.11.2025

By | November 29, 2025

IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 29.11.2025

SectionCase Law TitleBrief SummaryCitationRelevant Act
N/A (Press Release)CBDT launches 2nd NUDGE initiative to strengthen voluntary compliance in respect of Foreign AssetsCBDT launched a second campaign to encourage voluntary disclosure and compliance regarding foreign assets using data reported by foreign jurisdictions under AEOI.Income Tax PRESS RELEASE, DATED 27-11-2025Income-tax Act, 1961
2(14), 2(47)Shireen J. Dastur v. Income-tax OfficerCompensation received for withdrawing a civil suit claiming inheritance rights was not taxable as Capital Gains, as the right was not an existing enforceable right and thus not a transfer of a capital asset.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
11Swasth Foundation v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions)Accumulation benefit for unutilized grant could not be denied to a charitable trust for AY 2015-16 due to delayed filing of Form 9A, as the form was not required for that assessment year.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
28(i)Akashdeep Cloth Centre v. Principal Commissioner of Income-taxExcess cash and stock found during a survey were correctly treated as Business Income under Section 28(i), and the PCIT’s revision to treat it under Section 115BBE was set aside.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
36(1)(viia)GS Mahanagar Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-taxDeduction for provision for bad and doubtful debts was allowable to a bank even if not routed through the Profit and Loss account, provided it was reflected in audited financial statements.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
37(1)Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Koya and Company Construction Ltd.Ad-hoc disallowance of conveyance, travelling, and vehicle maintenance expenses was not sustainable when the AO did not reject books or identify personal use.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
54Hanchipura Channaiah Nandakishore v. Income-tax officer, International TaxationSection 54 relief for Capital Gains on a residential property sale was not disqualified even if the new property was purchased in the wife’s name and there was a delay in construction.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
69ALikha Saaya v. Income Tax OfficerCash deposits made into a bank account that were sourced from prior cash withdrawals from the same account and fully explained by the assessee could not be treated as unexplained money.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
92BADeputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Koya and Company Construction Ltd.Transfer Pricing adjustment reducing Section 80-IA deduction was deleted as there was no evidence of profit manipulation in sub-contracting works to an AE.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961
148AAnuradha Real Estate Developers Pvt Ltd v. Office of the Income-tax OfficerReassessment proceedings were set aside as the Revenue had not filed a claim during the CIRP of the company, and the tax claim stood extinguished upon NCLT’s approval of the Resolution Plan.Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961; IBC, 2016
263Likha Saaya v. Income Tax OfficerThe Principal Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to revise an assessment under Section 263 on issues that were sub judice before the Commissioner (Appeals).Click HereIncome-tax Act, 1961

For More :- Read IMPORTANT INCOME TAX CASE LAWS 27.11.2025