Month: December 2018

Archive for December, 2018


Laser Soft Infosystems Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 258 Taxman 308 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Software development -Provision towards liability for warranty for goods supplied was not crystalised during relevant year and it was merely provisional in nature-Not allowable as deduction.[ S.145 ]

CIT v. Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. (2018) 258 Taxman 238/( 2019) 410 ITR 423 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Salary paid to a sweeper for cleaning premises and hall which is in the name of founder of the company is held to be not allowable as deduction.

PCIT v. Lord Chloro Alkali Ltd. (2018) 97 taxmann.com 513/ 258 Taxman 131 (Raj) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed. PCIT v. Lord Chloro Alkali Ltd. (2018) 258 Taxman 130 (SC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure –Publicity expenses- Donations to support educational and social activities is held to be allowable as business expenditure.

Nortrans Marine Services (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 258 Taxman 115/ 305 CTR 321/ 170 DTR 108 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 36(1)(v) : Contribution approved gratuity fund -Contributions paid to LIC as premium for policy obtained for indemnification of gratuity liability towards employees, even for prior years, when employees were in employment of company taken over by assessee would be eligible for deduction .[S.37(1)]

CIT v. Sinochem India Co. (P.) Ltd. (2018) 258 Taxman 30/170 DTR 21 / 304 CTR 822 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 32 : Depreciation – Trade mark-Trademark was advertised for sale promotions of assessee’s products – Entitle depreciation .

PCIT v. Amar Singh Bhandari (2018) 258 Taxman 227 (Raj.)(HC)

S. 32 : Depreciation – Dumper’ and Valvo machines used by assessee for his own mining purposes as well as giving them on hire, were eligible for higher rate of depreciation

CIT v. Eveready Industries (India) Ltd. (2018) 258 Taxman 313 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 30 : Rent rates, taxes, repairs and insurance for buildings –Rent paid –Dispute pending and keys of premises were lying with police – Rent paid is held to be allowable deduction- No question of law [ S.37(1), 260A ]

L & T Finance Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2018) 258 Taxman 282 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 28(i) : Business income –Engaged in business of leasing, hire purchase and other financial activities – Amount was recognized as a profit on securitization of lease receivables in its profit & loss account – Assessable as business income -Matching concept was never even argued or raised before the Tribunal or raised before the High Court cannot be raised first time while arguing before the High Court. [ S.145, 260A ]

M.P. Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 258 Taxman 372/ 171 DTR 305/ 305 CTR 457 (MP)(HC)

S. 28(i) : Business income – Business of leasing out of land and getting rental income as land premium – land premium received by assessee was part and parcel of its business receipt and, hence, same was a taxable revenue receipt .[ S.10(20A)]

CIT v. Hemla Trust (2018) 258 Taxman 406/ 172 DTR 417/ 307 CTR 576 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 12AA : Procedure for registration –Trust or institution- Delay of 18 years 3 months and 21 days- Registration was granted prospectively with effect from 1-4-2007 relevant to assessment year 2008-09 and onwards, i.e., prospectively is held to be justified -Order of Tribunal to grant the registration retrospectively was set aside .