Top Legal Developments This Week [10-16 August 2026] | Tarun Tejpal’s Conviction; Bar Council Co-option; UPI Charges Clarified; and 20+ more stories
A quick roundup to cover all the important legal developments and cases this week.
ITAT
Carry forward of losses cannot be denied once return is validly filed under S. 139(1) of Income Tax Act
The assessee’s submitted that the authorities wrongly disallowed the carry forward of losses only because the return was filed late on 1-11-2019 at 00:00:37, and therefore not treated as a valid return under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act must reflect application of mind: Bombay High Court dismisses Revenue’s appeal
“An order, which does not reflect even minimum application of mind, cannot be saved by filing an affidavit claiming that there was material based upon which such approval could have been granted.”
Tribunals and Commissions November 2025 | Dead worm found in Veg Biryani; Disallowance deleted in Aishwarya Rai Bachchan case; Rajasthan bus fire tragedy; & more
Explore the key legal developments of November 2025, featuring CCI’s power to examine patented product disputes, dead worm found in Veg Biryani, deletion of disallowance against Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, grieving father bribing ambulance, woman’s death at Jammu-based Super Specialty Hospital and Rajasthan bus fire tragedy.
‘Defeats the ends of justice’; Bombay HC sets aside ITAT’s order treating income from same source differently for different assessment years
For the purposes of Income Tax Act, 1961, the business which is involved in letting out premises on hire, would be said to have commenced right from the stage of repairing and furnishing of property for being rented out and cannot be treated as commenced only when the premises are actually let out to tenants.
Advance/Loan amount used for purposes other than business execution is taxable as deemed dividend: Bombay High Court
Mere maintenance of running account by the appellant with GPIL, having continuous business transactions with them or mere repayment of advance within same financial year cannot be the reasons to admit that the amount of advance is actually utilized for execution of business transaction.
Read why ITAT rejected Congress Party’s appeal for exemption of Rs 199.15 Crores due to delay in filing ITR
The ITAT reiterated that so far as an interpretation of such an exemption provision in a fiscal statute was concerned, a stricter interpretation had to be employed rather than a liberal one.
Tata Steel’s contribution of Rs. 212.52 cr made to Compensatory Afforestation Fund to be treated as Revenue expenditure:Bombay High Court reiterates
The Court held that contribution to Compensatory Afforestation Fund will be considered as revenue expenditure and not capital in nature
S. 269-SS of Income Tax Act not applicable to receipt of sale consideration of immovable property in cash but only on loan or deposit: ITAT, Delhi
“Section 269-SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has a specific bar on receiving a sum more than 20,000/- from any other persons by way of loan or deposit.”
ITAT allows Vodafone’s claim of depreciation on goodwill acquired pursuant to slump sale acquisition of Call Centre Business from VEGL
ITAT noted that Parliament had taken due note that the Supreme Court had held that the goodwill arising on business reorganization i.e. amalgamation, slump sales, demerger etc. is a depreciable intangible asset under Section 32 of the Act.
Transaction doesn’t become stock in trade merely based on recording of inventory in books of accounts; SC asks ITAT to consider relevant factors afresh
Supreme Court reiterated that to examine whether a particular transaction is sale of capital assets or business expense, multiple factors like frequency of trade and volume of trade, nature of transaction over the years etc., are required to be examined.
Can deemed dividend be taxed in the hands of non-shareholders? ITAT answers
In terms of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act, treating the loans and advances received by concerns, in which shareholders of the company giving loans and advances had substantial interest, qualified as “deemed dividend”
Can revenue bring expenditure incurred in earlier years to be taxed in subsequent years? ITAT answers
After examining the expenses payable and the detailed order of the CIT,the ITAT held that the CIT has correctly examined the invoices, period and purpose for the expenses which have not been paid for the last six years
CIT was right in deleting addition made on account of low Gross Profit rate by AO without any justified reasoning: ITAT
It is a well-accepted principal of tax jurisprudence that the Assessing Officer cannot sit on the armchair of a businessman assessee to replace his business strategy by his own whims and fancies
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal directs Assessing Officer to charge assessee at gross profit rate of 6.5% on bogus purchases
ITAT said that the entire addition has been made by the AO as well as CIT based on guess work and estimation based on some alleged information received from Sales Tax Department of Maharashtra and from DGIT that “the assessee has taken bogus purchase bills without having taken any delivery of the goods”, without applying their mind.
[Monthly Roundup ] Top Stories like Arshad Warsi pump and dump case; Compensation on failure to deliver ‘Onam Sadya’; Sambhal cold storage collapse incident, and more [April 2023]
Explore decisions of Tribunals, Regulatory Bodies and Commissions in India with stories on supply of goods to overseas customers, question of condonation of delay by NCLAT, maintainability of application u/s 7 of IBC Code, NGT on violation of environmental norms by State, and so on.
Assessee not entitled to deduction u/s 80-IB of Income Tax Act on Duty drawback / DEPB Schemes profit: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court affirmed the order passed by the High Court stating that the respondent assessee was neither entitled to the deductions nor profit earned under Section 80-IB on the amount of DEPB as well as Duty Drawback Scheme.
RPC fee paid by Formula One not liable to be disallowed; Second proviso to S. 40(a)(i) be given retrospective effect: ITAT
ITAT held that the second proviso to Clause (i) of Section 40(a) just like second proviso to clause (ia) of Section 40(a) was inserted to remove an anomaly and were therefore curative and declaratory in nature. Hence, it had to be given retrospective effect.
Payment received by assessee from foreign company for business support services cannot be treated as FTS under Art. 12 (5) of India Netherlands DTAA: ITAT reiterates
ITAT noted that an identical issue was subject matter of consideration of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case, hence following the precedent, the Tribunal directed that the payment received in this case cannot be treated as FTS under Article 12 (5) of India Netherlands DTAA.
Top 14 Rulings from Tribunals, Commissions, Regulatory Authorities: Shiv Sena Party Symbol Dispute, Income Tax Act, Medical Negligence and more| February 2023 Roundup
This roundup contains many interesting rulings including the Shiv Sena Party Name and Symbol Dispute, Negligence committed by doctors and Compensation therein, Amendment to Section 178(6) of the Income Tax Act, Initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and more.