S.147 – Where AO is not satisfied, based on an audit objection, that there is escapement of any income chargeable to tax but still, resorts to reopening based on such audit objection and not based on his personal satisfaction, reopening is unjustified.

[M/s Larsen and Toubro Ltd. vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors. – Civil Appeal No.5390 of 2007 – Date: 21.03.17 – Supreme Court]


S.264 – Limitation should not come in the way while entertaining revision application u/s 264 when a genuine mistake was detected after completion of assessment. Here, CIT had ignored the history of litigation to the filing of revision petition. Further, revision petition was filed pursuant to Court’s order in first round granting leave to the Petitioner to approach CIT by filing petition u/s 264.

[Rites Ltd. vs. CIT – Writ Petition (C) No.5331/2014 – Date: 03.07.17 – Delhi High Court]

S.200 – Granting fifteen days extra time to “government deductor” as compared to “other deductor” to file TDS statements, is not in any manner “unreasonable” and “discriminatory”.

[Rajesh Kourani vs. Union of India – Special Civil Application No. 302 of 2014 – Date: 20.06.17 – Gujarat High Court]

S.200A – Even in absence of any “machinery provision” for computation of “fee” u/s 200A, it is open to the department to charge “fee” u/s 234E itself.

[Rajesh Kourani vs. Union of India – Special Civil Application No. 302 of 2014 – Date: 20.06.17 – Gujarat High Court]

S.200 – Granting fifteen days extra time to “government deductor” as compared to “other deductor” to file TDS statements, is not in any manner “unreasonable” and “discriminatory”.

[Rajesh Kourani vs. Union of India – Special Civil Application No. 302 of 2014 – Date: 20.06.17 – Gujarat High Court]
S.198 r.w.s. 199 r.w.r. 37BA – “Unrealized rent” was offered to tax under “income from house property” and then deducted u/s 23(1) r.w.r. 4. “Unrealized rent” is a deduction and not exemption. Hence, claim of TDS on such amount is allowable as it falls under the same category as ss.80IA/IB/IC.

[Shri Rangji Realties Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO – ITA No.6119/Mum/2016 – Date: 09.06.17 – Mumbai ITAT]

S.71(1), 28 & 69 – As per S.71(1), “Business loss” can be set-off against “unexplained income u/s 69” (taxable as “Income from other sources”). Here, the concerned business loss as well as unexplained income emanated from the very same undisclosed bank statement.

[Ghanshyam K. Kevadia vs. ITO – ITA No.1580/Ahd/2013 – Date: 18.04.17 – Ahmedabad ITAT]

S.68 – Assessee received gift from NRI family friend in the form of “India Millennium Certificate.” Assessee satisfied genuineness, creditworthiness and identity of the donor and gift was made through banking channel. CIT(A) made addition on the ground that there was no blood relation and occasion to receive such a huge gift and donor was not present before AO & CIT(A) for verification. Held, assessee satisfied all criteria and department failed to demonstrate with ample evidence why contention of assessee was disbelieved. Addition was deleted.

[Baldev Singh vs. DCIT – ITA No.2471/Del/2014 – Date: 08.06.17 – Delhi ITAT]