Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Tax & Customs LawSupreme Court of India

Commissioner of Income Tax 14 vs. Jasjit Singh (2023 INSC 882)

Not available · 2023 INSC 882Decided 26 Sept 2023
Not available
S. Ravindra Bhat · Aravind Kumar

Background

Following a search-and-seizure operation on a business group (M/s KOUTON Group) in 2009, the Income Tax Department found documents and material that it believed "belonged to" other, third-party taxpayers who had not themselves been searched. Under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, the Department can reassess such third parties' past six years of income, but a dispute arose over which date should mark the start of that six-year window: the date of the original search of the main party, or the later date when the papers were actually handed over to the tax officer in charge of the third party. The Delhi High Court, following its own earlier ruling (SSP Aviation), held it was the later "handover" date, and the tax department appealed.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's approach, agreeing that the six-year assessment period for a third party under Section 153C runs from the date the seized material is actually received by the assessing officer with jurisdiction over that third party, not from the date of the original search. The Court reasoned that treating the original search date as the trigger would unfairly penalise third parties who had no connection to the search and no way of knowing they would be drawn into proceedings, potentially forcing them to preserve records far beyond the legally required period. The appeals filed by the tax department were accordingly dismissed.

Lesson Learnt

If you are not the person actually searched by tax authorities but get roped into an assessment because your documents were found with someone else, the clock for how far back the taxman can reopen your returns runs from when your file was actually transferred to your assessing officer, not from the date of the original raid on someone else.

Commissioner of Income Tax 14 vs. Jasjit Singh (2023 INSC 882) – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware