Month: September 2018

Archive for September, 2018


Indian Galvanics Cyrium Foils Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 257 Taxman 32 / 303 CTR 800/ 168 DTR 241 (Bom) (HC)

S.37(1):Business expenditure- Education expenses of director’s son- No direct nexus with the business of the company – Not allowable as deduction .

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank. JCIT (2018) 256 Taxman 349 (Karn)( HC)

S. 36(1)(viii) : Eligible business – Special reserve -Artificial increase of profit by assessee by adding back amortization and depreciation in SLR investment so as to arrive higher amount of profit for claiming deduction under section 36(1)(viii) was unjustified.

CIT v. Keventer Agro Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 437 (Cal) (HC)

S. 36(1)(iii) :Interest on borrowed capital -Manufacture and sale of fruit juice and like products- Joint venture company for production of milk -Interest borrowed for setting up of joint venture is held to be allowable as deduction.

Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. v. ACIT ( 2018) 89 Taxmann.com 238 ( Delhi) (HC) Editorial: SLP is granted to the assessee, Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 256 Taxman 294 (SC)

S. 23: Income from house property – Annual value -Vacancy allowance -Construction business- Some flats constructed by assessee were not let out during year -Properties held as stock-in-trade were not let out for any previous years, vacancy allowance is not available-Liable to pay tax on the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year under S. 23(1)(a) of the Act. [ S. 22,23(1)(a), 23(1)(c) ]

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank. v. JCIT (2018) 256 Taxman 349 (Karn)(HC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income -Disallowance cannot be made in excess of actual exempted income-Matter remanded . [ R.8D ]

CIT v. Keventer Agro Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 437 (Cal) (HC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax -Capital or revenue -Power subsidy received by assessee company from State Government under Power Intensive Industries Scheme, 2005, for setting up a new industrial unit in backward area was capital receipt and, thus, not liable to tax

PCIT v. Bank Note Paper Mill India (P.) Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 429 / ( 2019) 412 ITR 415 (Karn ) ( HC) Editorial: Order in, ITO v Bank Note Paper Mill India P.Ltd ( 2017) 56 ITR 226 (Bqng) (Trib) is affirmed .

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Interest on bank deposits out of share capital- Prior to commencement of business operations- Interest is liable to be assesses as income from other sources- interest income would go to reduce capital cost of project and was on capital account and same could not be taxed as income from other sources [ S.56 , 145 ]