INCOME TAX CASE LAW 19.6.26

By | June 20, 2026

NCOME TAX CASE LAW 19.6.26

Relevant Act Section Case Law Title Brief Summary Citation
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 9 Denso International Asia Co. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, International Taxation Management and technical services receipts provided by a Thailand resident without an Indian PE are treated as ‘Business profits’ under Article 7 (not ‘Other income’ under Article 22) and are not taxable in India due to the absence of a specific FTS clause in the India-Thailand DTAA. Click Here
Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 Section 26 V.S.J. Dinakaran v. IRS, Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Benami Prohibition) The Appellate Tribunal’s condonation of a 763-day delay in the Revenue’s appeal against a dropped provisional attachment was upheld, as the exercise of discretion in the interest of substantial justice was not arbitrary or perverse. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 32 Hampi Expressways (P.) Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax – 1 PCIT cannot invoke revisionary powers under Section 263 when the AO accepted a possible, revenue-neutral view on concession rights depreciation, even if it differs from CBDT Circular No. 9/2014. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 32 Hampi Expressways (P.) Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax – 1 Highway operation and toll collection rights acquired under an NHAI concession agreement constitute depreciable intangible assets under Section 32; CBDT Circular No. 9/2014 cannot deny this. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 32 Hampi Expressways (P.) Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax – 1 Where depreciation on concession rights was allowed in earlier years, the opening WDV of the block cannot be disturbed to deny consequential depreciation in the current year. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 37(1) Pawan Hans Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT Helicopter repair and maintenance expenses capitalized under Ind AS-16 but relating to essential operational repairs are revenue in nature and fully deductible; accounting treatment does not govern tax eligibility. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 40(a)(ia) Pawan Hans Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT Where TDS on professional charges was deducted at a lower rate than prescribed, the Section 40(a)(ia) disallowance must be restricted strictly to the proportionate amount of the short deduction, not the entire expenditure. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 40(a)(ia) Pawan Hans Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT Disallowance for non-deduction of TDS on lease rentals paid to the AAI is proper in the initial year, but the deduction must be allowed in the subsequent year in which the TDS is deposited. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 40A(7) Pawan Hans Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT Gratuity debited to the P&L account as a mere book adjustment against excess past contributions to an approved trust (rather than a fresh unpaid provision) does not attract disallowance under Section 40A(7). Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 41(1) Pawan Hans Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT Partial relief/addition sustained by CIT(A) on a waived interest liability shown as extraordinary income requires no interference since the primary dispute on interest allowability remains sub-judice before the High Court. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 45 Income-tax Officer v. Goldflag Holdings (P.) Ltd. Gains from the sale of bonus shares classified as non-current investments and held for over 12 months must be accepted as exempt LTCG per CBDT Circular No. 6/2016, even if original shares were stock-in-trade. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 56 Rajendra Pal Singh Sandhu v. Income-tax Officer Deeming provisions of Section 56(2)(x) introduced w.e.f. 01-04-2017 apply only from AY 2018-19 onwards and cannot be invoked to tax the difference between SDV and consideration for a flat acquired in AY 2017-18. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 68 Indowestern Commodities and Energy Trade (P.) Ltd. v. ITO Mere non-compliance with the Companies Act for a refunded share application amount does not justify a Section 68 addition when the payer’s identity and creditworthiness are unchallenged. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 68 Indowestern Commodities and Energy Trade (P.) Ltd. v. ITO Large cash deposits during demonetisation cannot be added under Section 68 if they match fully recorded cash sales in accepted books of accounts and the trading results were not rejected. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 68 Newturn Automation (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer A reassessment order treating bank credits as unexplained cash credits without providing individual reasoning or establishing a lack of sales nexus is unreasoned, invalid, and must be quashed for fresh consideration. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 92C Inductotherm (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 2(1)(1) Entity-level TNMM remains the most appropriate transfer pricing method for sales to AEs if facts match prior years where it was consistently accepted; TPO cannot arbitrarily switch to an internal CPM. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 115JB Pawan Hans Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT CSR expenditures cannot be excluded from final accounts to adjust or alter book profits computed under Section 115JB. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 115JB Pawan Hans Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT A 1/5th Ind-AS transition amount treated as a statutory adjustment to ‘other equity’ (and accepted consistently by the department) falls under Section 115JB(2C) and cannot be added back as a prior period expense. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 143 Inductotherm (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 2(1)(1) Reversal of a provision that was already disallowed in the year of its creation cannot be taxed again as it causes double taxation; however, AO must verify the original disallowance. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 148 GSL Nova Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Following the approval of a Resolution Plan under Section 31 of the IBC, all prior tax claims stand extinguished and are binding on authorities; no Section 148 notice or 148A(d) order can be issued for such periods. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 149 Shailendra Nath Rai v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax For Section 148 limitation calculations, only the period from the 148A(b) notice to the response date is excluded, leaving 7 days to issue notice; issuing it 9 days after the reply is time-barred. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 149 Kala Kumar v. Income-tax Officer A Section 148 notice issued on 02.04.2022 for AY 2015-16 is time-barred and liable to be quashed under the amended provisions since the limitation period expired on 31.03.2022. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 149 Kala Kumar v. Income-tax Officer Reassessment initiated using gross sale consideration instead of the actual taxable capital gain fails the jurisdictional criteria, rendering the extended window under Section 149(1)(b) inapplicable. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 151 Accenture Impex (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax A Section 148 notice issued after 3 years requires sanction from the higher authority specified under Section 151(ii); approval by a PCIT instead invalidates the notice and subsequent assessment. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 194-I Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Biba Apparels (P.) Ltd. Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges paid to mall operators are payments made for services, correctly attracting a 2% TDS rate under Section 194C instead of 10% under Section 194I. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 199 Inductotherm (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 2(1)(1) Unallowed TDS/TCS credit claims must be restored to the AO for proper verification against Form 26AS, AIS, and supporting documentation before granting due credit. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 234A Denso International Asia Co. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, International Taxation Interest under Section 234A (and sequentially Section 234B) cannot be charged if a non-resident corporate assessee files its return within the statutory or extended timelines. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 270A Ajay Maheshwari v. ACIT Penalty for misreporting under Section 270A cannot be sustained on a legally debatable issue (like POEM) where all material facts were fully disclosed with bona fide explanations, despite the claim being rejected. Click Here
Income-tax Act, 1961 Section 271D Kirti Shankarlal Patel v. Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department, Government of India Show-cause notices for Section 269SS infractions issued after the expiry of a High Court-mandated 12-week remand timeline are time-barred and liable to be quashed. Click Here