Year: 2018

Archive for 2018


ACIT v. Splendor Landbase Limited ( Delhi)(Trib) , www.itatonline.org

S. 80 : Return for losses – Unabsorbed depreciation and carried forward losses – A return filed u/s 153A is deemed to be a return filed u/s 139(1). Accordingly, the restrictive provisions of S. 80 do not apply. The return u/s 153A, once accepted and assessed, replaces the original return filed u/s 139. Therefore, the assessee is eligible for carry forward business loss [ S.139(1), 153A ]

Supermax Personal Care Private Limted v. ACIT( 2018) 65 ITR 42 (SN) / 169 DTR 41 / 194 TTJ 815 ( Mum)(Trib) , www.itatonline.org

S. 45: Capital gains- Argument that the allotment of shares by the assessee’s holding co to foreign investors at huge valuation results in a “transfer”/ “indirect transfer” of the assessee’s assets to the foreign investors is not correct. Argument that a multi layered holding structure was deliberately created to avoid taxes in India and to conceal the information about the ultimate beneficiaries is also not correct [ S.2 (47), 48 ]

Ernst & Young Ltd. v. ACIT (IT) (2018) 94 taxmann.com 227 ( Mum) (Trib), www.itatonline.org

S. 44C: Non-residents – Head office expenditure -A non- resident assessee is entitled to claim deduction of an amount equal to 5% of the adjusted total income as expenditure in the nature of Head Office (HO) Expenses. The fact that the expenses are not debited in the Profit & loss account or the books of account is irrelevant. The entries in the books of account are not conclusive [ S.145 ]

Venkatavarthan N. Iyengar v. ACIT ( Mum) (Trib)

S.23: Income from house property –Annual value – The assessee has the option to claim as self occupied property which is more beneficial to him [ S.22 ]

Nokia Networks OY, v. JCIT ( 2018) 65 ITR 23/ 167 DTR 137/ 194 TTJ 137 /171 ITD 1 ( SB) (Delhi ( Trib) www.itatonline.org

S. 9(1)(i):Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Business connection -Subsidiary of a foreign company constitutes “business connection” and/ or “fixed Permanent Establishment” and/or “Dependent Agent Permanent Establishment” of assessee in India-Held No , (b) whether any attributes of profits on account of signing, network planning and negotiation of off-shore supply contracts in India could be attributed to such business connection/ permanent establishment -Held No and (c) whether notional interest on delayed consideration of supply of equipment and licensing of software taxable in the hands of assessee as interest from vendor financing- Held No -DTAA- India –Finland –Majoriy view is in favour of the assesee. [ Art .5, 7 ]

B. L. Passi v. CIT ( 2018) 404 ITR 19/ 165 DTR 143 / 302 CTR 81/ 255 Taxman 143 (SC) , www.itatonline.org

Interpretation of taxing statutes – Interpretation of taxing statutes to be construed harmoniously with object of statute.

ACIT v. Bharat V. Patel (2018) 404 ITR 37/ 165 DTR 218/ 302 CTR 110 / 255 Taxman 324 (SC) , www.itatonline.org

Interpretation of taxing statutes – Income -tax -General principles -Taxing provisions must be construed strictly so that no person who is otherwise not liable to pay tax , be liable to pay tax .

Seabird Exploration Fz Llc, In Re (2018) 403 ITR 82/302 CTR 19 / 165 DTR 33 (AAR)

S. 44BB : Mineral oils – Computation -Consideration received under contract is not fees for technical fees or royalty -Consideration received was held to be taxable as business income – DTAA -India United Arab Emirates- Duration of operation of less than 120 days is not material . [ S. 9(1) (vi), 9(1)(vii) Art. 5(1),12 ]

CIT v. Sunita Dhadda [2018] 403 ITR 309 (St.) (SC)/Editorial : Order in CIT v. Sunita Dhadda (2018) 406 ITR 220 ( Raj) (HC)// CIT v. Vijay Laxmi Dhadda (Smt) (2018) 406 ITR 220 ( Raj) (HC) is affirmed .

S. 69 :Unexplained investments – ‘On-money’ – Sale of land -Burden is on the department to show that ‘on-money’ consideration passed to the seller from the purchaser- Opportunity to cross examine the witnesses was not provided to the assessee- Addition was deleted . [ S.131 ]

Council of the ICAI v. Ashok Kumar ( 2018) 252 Taxman 129 ( Delhi) (HC)

Chartered Accountants Act, 1949

S. 21: Misconduct – SEBI and Disciplinary Committee of ICAI have found the respondent Chartered Accountant is guilty of several irregularities in public issue of a company – Removal of name from Register of Members of ICAI for a period of one year was held to be valid .