Month: February 2019

Archive for February, 2019


ACIT v. Celerity Power LLP (2019) 174 ITD 433 /197 TTJ 45 / 174 DTR 68 (Mum) (Trib.) ,www.itatonline.org

S. 72A : Carry forward and set off of accumulated loss – Conversion of Private Limited Company to LLP – Failure to satisfy conditions laid down in proviso – Carry forward of losses of erstwhile company by LLP is not entitled .[ S.47 xiiib), 72A (6A), Limited Liability Partnership Act , 2008 , S. 56,58 (4)]

ACIT v. Celerity Power LLP (2019) 174 ITD 433/197 TTJ 45 / 174 DTR 68 (Mum) (Trib.) ,www.itatonline.org

S. 49 : Capital gains – Previous owner – Cost of acquisition – Conversion of Private Limited Company to LLP -Capital assets become property of assessee by succession, inheritance or devolution, cost of acquisition of assets shall be deemed to be cost for which previous owner of property had acquired same. [ S. 2(42A)45 , 49(1)(iii)]

ACIT v. Celerity Power LLP (2019) 174 ITD 433/197 TTJ 45/ 174 DTR 68 (Mum) (Trib.) www.itatonline.org

S. 48 : Capital gains – Computation – Full value of consideration – Conversion of a private limited company into assessee-LLP -Book value – Book value was to be regarded as full value of consideration for purpose of computation of capital gains .[ S.45 , 47 ]

ACIT v. Celerity Power LLP (2019) 174 ITD 433 /197 TTJ 45 / 174 DTR 68 (Mum) (Trib.) www.itatonline.org

S. 47A : Capital gains – Withdrawal of exemption – Conversion of firm in to LLP – Provision will apply only for purpose of withdrawing an exemption earlier availed by an assessee and not for determination of exemption under section 47(xiiib) of the Act .[ S. 45 47A(4)]

ACIT v. Celerity Power LLP (2019) 174 ITD 433//197 TTJ 45 (Trib.) ,www.itatonline.org

S.47(xiiib): Capital gains – Transaction not regarded as transfer – Conversion of firm in to LLP– Transfer -On cumulative satisfaction of conditions (a) to (f) of proviso to section 47(xiiib) would not be chargeable to capital gains [ S.45 ]

Ram Siromani Tripathi v. State of U.P.(SC),www.itatonline.org

S. 261 : Appeal – Supreme Court -Adjournment -An adjournment cannot be sought on the ground that Counsel is out of station-Opportunity was given to the counsel to argue the matter, however he could not argue the matter – The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution-Court also observed that under no circumstances, application for restoration shall be entertained.

ITO v. Yadu Steels & Power Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

S. 68: Cash credits- Share capital – In the case of a Private company, onus is on assessee to prove identity, creditworthiness of subscribers and most importantly genuineness of transactions- Even if AO does not make inquiry, CIT(A) should do so-Relief cannot be given merely on basis of Ration Card, Share Application forms, Voter ID etc of the subscribers -Matter was set aside to AO to decide according to the law . [ S.131 ]

PCIT v. NDR Promoters Pvt. Ltd ( 2019) 410 ITR 379 / 175 DTR 30 /261 Taxman 270/ 307 CTR 281 (Delhi)(HC),www.itatonline.org.Editorial: SLP of assessee is dismissed , NDR Promoters (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2019) 266 Taxman 93 / 418 ITR 10 (St) (SC)

S. 68: Cash credits- Share capital- Share premium- Bogus share capital in form of accommodation entries- Directors were working as peons, receptionists etc, who have admitted that they have signed the documents as per direction of Mr Tarun Goyal- Details were filed ,however they have been not produced before the AO for examination- Deletion of addition by the Tribunal is held to be not justified .[ S.133(6) ]

Marie Gold Realtors Pvt. Ltd v. PCIT (Mum) (Trib) (UR)

S. 263: Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Depreciation on tenancy rights – Allowed in original assessment – Legally permissible view – Revision and disallowance by PCIT – Mere change in opinion – Revision is bad in law. [S. 32(1)(ii)]

Kesar Realty Pvt Ltd v. DCIT (Mum) (Trib) (UR) Kesar Housing and Development Co v .DCIT (Mum)(Trib) (UR).

S. 271(1) (c ): Penalty –Concealment – Charge is not specified – Inaccurate particulars of income – Levy of penalty on concealing particulars of income-Levy of penalty is held to be void ab initio- Explanation 5A . [S.153C, 274 ]