Year: 2018

Archive for 2018


CIT v. Sant Girdhar Anand Parmhans Sant Ashram. (2018) 408 ITR 79/ 305 CTR 99/ 168 DTR 289 (P&H) (HC)

S. 80G : Donation -Spending more than 5 percent of income on pooja and telecast – Denial of approval was not justified when the exemption was granted under S.12AA of the Income -tax Act .[ S.12AA, 80G(5)(vi) ]

Mahesh Kumar Agarwal Alias Mahesh Agarwal v. ACIT (2018) 408 ITR 119/( 2019) 173 DTR 299/ 306 CTR 479 (Pat) (HC)

S. 69A : : Unexplained money – Income from undisclosed sources — Illegal gains by short supply of contracted articles – Addition as income from undisclosed source is held to be justified .

Shreenath Heritage Liquor Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 408 ITR 198 (Raj) (HC)

S.68:Cash credits — Share capital- The assessee being a private limited company the burden of proof was on a higher pedestal even though the assessee had furnished the particulars of the bank accounts, passport, permanent account number card, addresses and earnings by the shareholder-cum-director and the money had been invested through banking channels- the share subscribers did not have their own profit making apparatus and were not involved in business activity- Money was routed through – Profit motive normal in the case of investment was entirely absent -No profit or dividend was declared -Genuineness of transactions were doubted –Addition was held to be justified -No question of law arose . [ S.260A ]

CIT v. Vasantha Subramanian Hospitals Pvt. Ltd (2018) 408 ITR 176/ 258 taxman 396 / 172 DTR 423/( 2019) 307 CTR 569(Mad) (HC)

S. 40A(3) :Expenses or payments not deductible – Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits -Deletion of addition by Tribunal on ground that expenditure negligible considering turnover of assessee -Matter Remitted to AO to redo assessment on consideration of related documents .

CIT v. Health India TPA Services P. Ltd. (2018) 408 ITR 34 (Bom) (HC) Editorial: Decision in ACIT v. Health India TPA Services P. Ltd ( 2014) 31 ITR 407 ( Mum)( Trib) is affirmed .

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Fees for professional or technical services – third party administrator for insurance companies – Payment through assessee- Not liable to deduct tax at source- No disallowances can be made [ S. 194J, 260A ]

CIT v. Dedicated Healthcare Services (TPA ) India Pvt. Ltd. (2018] 408 ITR 36/ 259 Taxman 192 / 304 CTR 937/ 170 DTR 345(Bom) (HC)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Fees for professional or technical services – third party administrator for insurance companies – Payment through assessee- Not liable to deduct tax at source- No disallowances can be made [ S. 194J, 260A ]

CIT v. Vasantha Subramanian Hospitals Pvt. Ltd (2018) 408 ITR 176/ 258 Taxman 396/ 172 DTR 423/( 2019) 307 CTR 569 (Mad) (HC)

S.37(1):Business expenditure — Marketing expenses -Multi-Speciality Hospital — Gifts to doctors – Matter Remitted To Assessing Officer for verification to find out whether for canvasing for patients .

Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 408 ITR 125 (Ker) (HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure -Expenditure on acquisition of distribution rights of feature films —Film must be commercially exploited and income received and credited in books — Feature films never exhibited and no amount credited in profit and loss account —Deduction is not allowable .[ R9B ]

CIT v. Acer India Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 408 ITR 24 (Karn) (HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure -Provision for warranty which is made on scientific basis is deductible. [ S.145 ]

CIT v. Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. (2018) 408 ITR 184 / 259 Taxman 97(Delhi) (HC)

S. 36(1)(iii) :Interest on borrowed capital – Advances made to sister concerns from own funds – No disallowances can be made .[ S.37(1) ]