Month: June 2018

Archive for June, 2018


ACIT v. Chaitanya Godavari Grameena Bank. (2018) 170 ITD 668/66 ITR 31 (Visakh) (Trib.)

S. 36(1)(viia) :Bad debt-Provision for bad and doubtful debts – Schedule bank – Provision for standard assets is purely contingent hence cannot be allowed as deduction.

Tata Hitachi Construction Machinery Company Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 170 ITD 720 / 65 ITR 86( SN)(Bang) (Trib.)

S. 35 :Scientific research – Deduction on account of purchase of ‘assets’ for its in-house R&D facility is allowable as deduction. Objective behind exclusion clause in S. 43(4)(ii) is to be that expenditure on scientific research should be incurred on research actually carried out by assessee in-house and assessee should not spend money in acquiring rights in or arising out of scientific research carried on by some other person. [ S.35(1)(iv) , 43(4)(ii) ]

Tata Hitachi Construction Machinery Company Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 170 ITD 720 /65 ITR 86 (SN)(Bang) (Trib.)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income –Sufficient interest free own funds to cover investment in shares and mutual funds etc –No disallowance can be made [ R.8D(2)(ii) ]

Puran Chand Dharmarth Trust. v. ITO (2018) 170 ITD 687/ 168 DTR 1 / 194 TTJ 643/ 64 ITR 50 (SN)(Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Advance of loan to another trust where the common trustees had no substantial interest and advance not being investment there is no violation hence exemption cannot be denied and registration cannot be refused .[ S.10(23C)(vi),13(1)(d) ]

JCIT v. Bharat Business Channels Ltd. (2018) 170 ITD 628(Mum) (Trib.)

S. 194H : Deduction at source – Commission or brokerage -Trade discount granted to principal distributor could not be held as commission and, hence not liable for deduction of tax at source .

JCIT v. Bharat Business Channels Ltd. (2018) 170 ITD 621 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 194C : Deduction at source – Contractors – Installation of set-top box by ISPs amounts to works contract and as no technical expertise is required provision of S.194J cannot be applicable .[ S.194J ]

Bhinmal Contractors Property and Land Developers (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT DCIT (2018) 170 ITD 599 / 169 DTR 75/ 195 TTJ 101 (Mum) (Trib.)

S.80IA:Industrial undertakings – Infrastructure development-Developer- Contractor- Business of construction/development of Infrastructure facilities such as roads and providing necessary and crucial components of Railway system is entitle to deduction as developer . [ S.80IA(4) ]

Vibhu Aggarwal. v. DCIT (2018) 170 ITD 580 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 69A : Unexplained money -Search -Jewellary- Belonged to a wealthy family and jewellery was received on occasions from relatives, excess jewellery was very much reasonable addition was held to be not justified .

Hemato Oncology Clinic (Ahmedabad) (P.) Ltd. (2018) 170 ITD 621 / 169 DTR 315 / 194 TTJ 885 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 40A(2): Expenses or payments not deductible – Excessive or unreasonable -Salaries paid to Doctors who were reputed professionals in their fields could not be held to be excessive and unreasonable hence disallowance of 15% of salaries was deleted .

Arcadia Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 170 ITD 616 (Mum) (Trib.)

S.37(1): Business expenditure –Keyman insurance policy in the name of directors is held to be allowable as business expenditure .