S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Reassessment notice issued after 29.03.2022 by Jurisdictional AO instead of Faceless AO is without jurisdiction and void ab initio-DRP cannot ignore binding jurisdictional High Court ruling in Hexaware Technologies Ltd-Refusal to follow jurisdictional precedent is impermissible-the Court also cautioned the tax authorities that continued disregard of binding jurisdictional precedents may invite contempt action. [S. 144C, 147, 148, 151A, Art. 226].

Vibhavari Bharat Bhatt v. ITO (Intl.) (Bombay High Court) https://itatonline.org/digest/verdicts/vibhavari-bharat-bhatt-v-ito-intl-bombay-high-court/

Hon’ble Delhi ITAT held that mechanical approval cannot be sustainable in law in the light of judicial dicta available. The approval memo is totally silent on the issues involved and has granted omnibus approval without any thoughtful process being discernible. A single approval u/s 153D has been accorded in respect of Three assessment years and there is no other material to show involvement of the superior authority in the course of assessment proceedings. Thus, applying the ratio of judgements delivered as noted above, the assessment order based on ritualistic approval stands vitiated.

Gaurav Kathuria vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) https://itatonline.org/digest/verdicts/gaurav-kathuria-vs-acit-itat-delhi/

Reassessment proceedings Section 147 –
Where notice under section 148 was issued not only in contravention of provisions of section 151 as sanction of concerned Specified Authority as prescribed i.e PCCIT was not obtained, but same was also time-barred as per provisions of section 149 as same was issued after three years, therefore, impugned notice issued under section 148 being void ab initio was liable to be quashed.

Rohit Goel v. DCIT (ITAT Delhi) https://itatonline.org/digest/verdicts/rohit-goel-v-dcit-itat-delhi/

Draft Income Tax rules sweeten the old regime a bit;
1) HRA in Pune, Blr etc hiked to 50% of basic
2) Employer Gifts up to 15k exempt (up from 5k)
3) Child Education up from Rs 100 to 3k a month
4) Hostel Allowance from Rs 300 to 9k a month
5) Free meals up to Rs 200 exempt https://x.com/ActusDei/status/2023241050538872963

🚨 Important Compliance Alert for All CAs & Professionals Filing AOC-4: Never upload financial statements with only “SD/-” appearing in place of actual signatures. 🚨

Recently, ICAI Disciplinary Committee has took serious note of a case where the Balance Sheet & Audit Report attached with Form AOC-4 did not bear original signatures of Directors & Statutory Auditor. Only an “SD/- copy” was filed on MCA portal.

The Committee held this as a clear violation of:
• Section 134(1) of Companies Act, 2013
• Rule 8 of Companies (Registration Offices & Fees) Rules, 2014

Rule 8 specifically mandates that:
➡️ Scanned documents must be of original signed financial statements
➡️ Attachments cannot be blank or unsigned
➡️ The professional certifying the form is responsible for correctness of enclosures

Even if the CA argues “it was a curable defect” or “instruction kit didn’t mention it”, the defence is NOT accepted.

ICAI observed that:
⚠️ A certifying professional is expected to exercise strict due diligence
⚠️ Oversight by staff is not an excuse
⚠️ Wrong / incomplete attachments can lead to professional misconduct

Result: Disciplinary action + Reprimand under Clause (7) of Part I of Second Schedule (Gross Negligence / Lack of Due Diligence).

Access full Order from here: https://disc.icai.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/86.-DC-1942-2024.pdf
Source: https://x.com/CAHimankSingla/status/2023586985785675901

Supreme Court flags "alarming" trend of AI being used for drafting petitions

If a particular ground was ‘conditionally not pressed’ by the Assessee before the CIT (A), the Assessee can raise that ground before the ITAT in Revenue’s appeal against the CIT (A)’s order. Dismissal of such a ground by the ITAT without adjudication constitutes a mistake apparent from the record and the order of the ITAT was liable to be recalled.

Ravi Sellappan v. DCIT, Pune (ITAT Pune) https://itatonline.org/digest/verdicts/ravi-sellappan-v-dcit-pune-itat-pune/

ITAT grants relief to Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi in ₹133 crore income assessment matter https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/itat-grants-relief-to-mukul-rohatgi-in-133-crore-income-assessment-matter

By analysing 60 terabytes of transactional data of a pan-India billing software used by more than one lakh restaurants, the Income Tax department's Hyderabad investigation unit has revealed that these eateries suppressed sales turnover worth at least Rs 70,000 crore since the 2019-20 financial year. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/i-t-probe-into-hyd-biryani-joints-blows-lid-off-multi-crore-tax-evasion-scam-across-india/articleshow/128522871.cms

HUGE ICAI BREAKING: ICAI has found 11 Chartered Accountants from Ahmedabad guilty of professional misconduct in a matter linked to an alleged bogus political donation network that was earlier flagged by the Income Tax Department. Source: https://x.com/CAHimankSingla/status/2024396060555346101?s=20

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue- Long-term capital gains on equity-oriented funds-Annual letting value of properties-Non-initiation of penalty proceedings-Where AO had examined the details and taken a possible view, revision was not justified. [S. 45, 112A, 14A, 23, 24(b), 143(3), 271C]

Shri Mukul Rohatgi v. PCIT (ITAT Delhi)

https://itatonline.org/digest/verdicts/shri-mukul-rohatgi-v-pcit/

ITC Reversal Under Rule 42 and 43: Why the GSTR-2B Auto-Reversal Formula Penalises Compliant Taxpayers for Vendor Defaults

By Adv. Aaditya Bhatt and Adv. Chandni Joshi

https://itatonline.org/digest/articles/itc-reversal-under-rule-42-and-43-why-the-gstr-2b-auto-reversal-formula-penalises-compliant-taxpayers-for-vendor-defaults/

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) – Estimated Addition on Bogus Purchases ITAT Mumbai -Income Tax Officer, Ward 41(2)(2), Mumbaiv. In Coach Builders** ITA No. 7993/MUM/2025 ITAT Mumbai Bench Order dated: 18.02.2026 Assessment Year: 2009-10
https://x.com/caanupam7/status/2025122058552967462?s=20

UP potter selling Rs 2 clay pots gets Rs 1.2 crore GST notice. PAN and Aadhaar details were misused to commit fraud in his name. https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/gst-notice-rs-125-crore-poor-potter-mohammad-saeed-raebareli-amid-suspected-identity-fraud-2872205-2026-02-21

⚖️ Big Legal Battle Ahead!

Bar Council of India (BCI) has challenged the appearance of CAs and other professionals before Tribunals like ITAT, GSTAT, NCLT, etc., in the Delhi High Court.

👉 This case could redefine who can represent taxpayers & corporates before tribunals.

Next Hearing: 16 March, 2026 Source: https://x.com/rambajajgst/status/2025805985852563787?s=20

S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-Development agreement-Indexed cost of acquisition-Assessee entitled to indexation on entire property and not restricted to 22.5% land share – Multiple floors in same redeveloped building constitute one residential house – Deduction u/s 54 allowable. [S. 2(47), 45, 48]

Seeta Nayyar v. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) https://itatonline.org/digest/verdicts/seeta-nayyar-v-acit-itat-mumbai/

S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice-Sanction of specified authority-Notice issued beyond three years from end of relevant assessment year-Approval obtained from Pr. CIT instead of Pr. CCIT/CCIT-Invalid assumption of jurisdiction-Reassessment quashed. [S. 144, 147, 148, 148A(d), 151(ii)]

Arvindbhai Khatri Sons Designs Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) https://itatonline.org/digest/verdicts/arvindbhai-khatri-sons-designs-pvt-ltd-v-acit-itat-mumbai/

Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 .
S. 23(2) : Open membership-Nominee-Succession dispute-Scope of revisional jurisdiction-Nomination does not confer ownership- Majority legal heirs supporting claim-Tenant has no locus to challenge internal arrangement among heirs-Revisional authority exceeded jurisdiction in interfering with grant of membership. [Art. 226]

Pravinkumar Jethalal Dave v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Bombay High Court) https://itatonline.org/digest/verdicts/pravinkumar-jethalal-dave-v-state-of-maharashtra-ors-bombay-high-court/

India amends tax treaty with France and
Under the revised framework, dividend income will now be taxed at 5% for shareholders holding at least 10% of a company's capital and at 15% for all other investors. https://x.com/RoyLakshman/status/2025851083860607108

Download TRANSFER PRICING DIGEST (JANUARY 2026) by Dr. Sunil Moti Lala, Advocate, CA, LL. B, Ph.D (covering 7 chapters, 32 sub chapters & 81 rulings in 30 pages). Each of the 32 sub chapters in the index is hyperlinked to the case summary in the Digest. Hyperlink is provided at the bottom of each page to go to the index. Taxman & Taxsutra citation are provided as well as the appeal no & date of order so that the same can be accessed even by those who have not subscribed to Taxmann & Taxsutra https://itatonline.org/archives/digest-of-important-case-laws/