Year: 2018

Archive for 2018


Vodafone M-Pesa Ltd. v PCIT (2018) 164 DTR 257/ 256 Taxman 240 (Bom)(HC)

S.220:Collection and recovery – Stay –Pendency of appeal before CIT(A) -Direction of the CIT to enhancing to pay 50% of demand when first appeal is pending is held to be bad in law – Application for stay was pending before CIT(A)-CIT(A ) was directed to dispose the stay application with in four weeks and stay will continue for further period of two weeks.

Harish Kumar Gupta v. CCIT (2018) 404 ITR 590/163 DTR 260 / 301 CTR 354 (Uttarakhand) (HC)

S.154: Rectification of mistake apparent on record -Levy of interest- Delay in filing of return-Waiver of interest – Petition was dismissed .[ S. 234A, 234B, 234C ]

CIT v. Blue Star Ltd. (2018) 162 DTR 302 / 301 CTR 38 (Bom) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment – Recorded reason was 31 st March 2010 where as notice u/s 148 was issued on 30 th March 2010 -Recording of reasons before issue of notice is mandatory hence Reassessment was held to be bad in law [ S.148 ]

PDS Logistics International (P) Ltd. v CCIT (2018) 164 DTR 222/ 256 Taxman 167 /304 CTR 996/ ( 2019) 414 ITR 527 (Karn) (HC)

S. 139 : Return of income -Delay due to crashing of computer system – Application which was filed for condonation of delay was rejected, after six years of filing of petition was held to be not justified -CIT was directed to condone the delay and hear the matter expeditiously with the observation that delay in disposing the application after six years of filing of the petition has to be viewed seriously while rendering substantial justice to parties . [ S.119(2)(b) ]

B.U. Bhandari Nandgude Patil Associates v. CBDT (2018) 164 DTR 201/ 255 Taxman 60/ 302 CTR 472 (Delhi)( HC)

S.139:Return of Income- Delay of five months due to illness of Auditor however details of illness and any proof of doctor’s prescription was not given- Delay was not condoned- Discipline on time limits regarding filing of returns had to be complied and respected, unless compelling and good reasons were shown and established for grant of extension of time . [ S.80IB ,119]

PCIT v. Evalueserve Sez (Gurgaon) (P) Ltd. (2018) 164 DTR 297/302 CTR 172 (Delhi)(HC)

S.92C: Transfer pricing -Arms’ length price- Functionally different -Exclusion of six comparables by the Tribunal by the Tribunal was held to be justified .

CIT v. Ace India Abodes Ltd. (2018) 162 DTR 118 (Raj)(HC)

S. 40A(3) :Expenses or payments not deductible – Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits -20% expenditure -Purchase of land as stock in trade -Villagers paid the amount in cash in the absence of banking facilities deletion of addition was held to be justified [ R.6DD(h)]

Ellora Paper Mills Ltd. v CIT (2018) 163 DTR 42 / 301 CTR 252 (Bom)( HC)

S. 40A(3) :Expenses or payments not deductible – Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits – Evidence in the form of bills etc. was not produced. Disallowance was confirmed . [ R.6DD(h) ,(j )]

PCIT v. Mobisoft Tele Solutions (P) LTD. (P) LTD. (2018)404 ITR 203/ 163 DTR 289 / 301 CTR 582/90 taxmann.com 383 (P&H) (HC)

S.37(1): Business expenditure -Capital or revenue-Fees paid for Licence to use copy right was held to be allowable as revenue expenditure.

CIT v. Deepak Vegpro (P) Ltd. (2018) 406 ITR 496/161 DTR 170 / 300 CTR 98 (Raj)(HC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income -Invested own money therefore no disallowance of interest can be made in respect of borrowed funds [S. 36(1)(iii), R.8D ]