Year: 2018

Archive for 2018


Janak Kanakbhai Trivedi v. ITO (2018) 257 Taxman 367 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 45: Capital gains- Individual or HUF- Sale deed was executed in individual capacity and PAN of the individual-Sale consideration was also not deposited in the HUF’ Bank account-Assessing the capital gains in the assessment of the assessee is held to be justified [ S.4 ]

PCIT v. Shalimar Chemical Works Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxman 590 (Cal.) (HC)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Commission or brokerage – Selling expenses which consisted of target incentives to distributors -Not liable to deduct tax at source- No disallowance can be made .[ S.194H ]

PCIT v. Shalimar Chemical Works Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxman 590 (Cal.) (HC)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Contractors – Purchase of packing material- Right of ownership of packing material was only transferred to assessee only when it was purchased from suppliers -Not liable to deduct tax at source –No disallowance can be made . [ S.194C ]

PCIT v. Sanghi Infrastructure Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxman 371 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source -Reimbursement of lease rent charges – Not liable to deduct tax at source -Provision for contingent liability for which bills were not received during year under consideration and TDS was deducted as and when final bills were received – No disallowance can be made .[ S.194I ,

PCIT v. West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. ( 2018) 257 Taxman 570 / ( 2019) 306 CTR 601/ 173 DTR 377/ 413 ITR 82 ( Cal) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed , PCIT v. West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd ( 2019) 263 Taxman 237 (SC)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source -Interest- Payment for delayed allotment of land by Housing Corp. is not interest since there was neither any borrowing of money nor was there incurring of debt on part of assessee hence not liable to deduct tax at source-No disallowance can be made [ S.2(28A), 194A]

Asianet Communications Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 407 ITR 706 / 257 Taxman 473 /( 2019) 175 DTR 202 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure -Capital or revenue -Non-compete fee for five years – Allowable as revenue expenditure .

Monitron Security (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 257 Taxman 351 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure -Capital or revenue-Amount paid to associate company, (G4S) for providing expert advisory and other security related services and knowhow inter-alia including use of trademarks -Not allowable as business expenditure as the amount was not incurred for wholly and exclusively for business purposes ,as the assessee has not led any evidence to establish the manner in which the technical know-how as acquired from G4S had been used in its business.

CIT v. Shriram Chits & Investments (P.) Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxman 395 /( 2019) 410 ITR 10(Mad.)(HC)

S. 36(1)(vii) : Bad debt – Failure of subscribers of chit fund to make payment of their instalments is allowable as bad debt.

CIT v. Shriram Chits & Investments (P.) Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxman 395/(2019) 410 ITR 10 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 32 : Depreciation –Leasing of vehicles- Asset utilized for the purposes of business- Entitle to depreciation

PCIT v. JIS Foundation (2018) 89 taxmann.com 226 (Cal) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is admitted ; PCIT v. JIS Foundation (2018) 257 Taxman 261 / 96 taxmann.com 257 (SC)/257 Taxman 553 /96 taxmann.com 611 (SC)

S. 12AA : Procedure for registration –Trust or institution- At time of initiation of proceedings for cancellation of registration in year 2008, Commissioner did not have such a power in terms of sub-section (3) of section 12AA and, accordingly the order was to be set aside [ S.12A ]