Month: October 2019

Archive for October, 2019


PCIT v. Dishman Pharmaceuticals and Chemicals Ltd. (2019) 417 ITR 373/ 112 taxmann.com 91 / (2020) 190 DTR 307(Guj.)(HC)

S. 10B : Export oriented undertakings-Derived from-Dividend income, profits on sale of fixed assets, profits on sale of investments, excess provision return back, duty drawback and interest income could be said to have direct nexus with the income of the business of the undertaking-Eligible deduction. [S. 10A, 10B(4)]

Navodaya Education Trust v. UOI (2019) 417 ITR 157 (Karn.)(HC) Editorial : Decision in Navodya Education Trust v. UOI (2018) 405 ITR 30 / 253 Taxman 412 / 302 CTR 381 / 165 DTR 16 (Karn.)(HC) is reversed.

S. 10(23C) : Educational institution–Withdrawal of exemption-Collection of capitation fee–Notice of withdrawal containing unspecified allegation-Notice and consequent order is held to be not valid. [S. 10(23C)(vi) S. 132]

Rupesh Rashmikant Shah v. UOI (2019) 417 ITR 169/ 182 DTR 203/ 310 CTR 526 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax–Compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-Interest on compensation awarded up to date of order of Tribunal or Court is held to be not taxable-Provision of deduction at source is not charging section. [S. 56(2)(viii) 145A(b), 194A, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, S. 171]

Aswani Enterprises v. ACIT (2019) 417 ITR 223 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 2(22)(e) : Deemed dividend-Advances received from company-Two partners are shareholders with substantial interest-Accumulated profits-Not able to substantiate that the advance was in the course of business-Deemed dividend for the assessment year 1998-99, had to be computed only after deducting the advances given in the earlier assessment years and accordingly the accumulated profits of the lending company had to be reduced to that extent-Order of Tribunal is affirmed.

PCIT v. Vembu Vaidyanathan ( 2019) 261 Taxman 376/ 176 DTR 446 / 308 CTR 302 /( 2019) 413 ITR 248(Bom)(HC), www.itatonline.org Editorial :SLP of revenue is dismissed PCIT v Vembu Vaidyanathan ( 2019) 265 Taxman 535 (SC)/ Order of DCIT v. Shri Vembu Vaidyanathan, ITA NO.5749/Mum/2013 dt 29-10-2015

S. 45 : Capital gains-Allotment letter-The allottee gets title to property on issue of allotment letter- the payment of instalments is only a follow¬-up action-Taking delivery of possession is only a formality- the date of allotment is the date on which the purchaser of a residential unit can be stated to have acquired the property and not on the date of registration of agreement – Assessable as long term capital gains – Entitle benefit of S. 54F. [S. 2(14),, 2(29A, 2(29B)2(42A), 54, 54F]

Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. State of U.P (2019) 265 Taxman 5 (All.)(HC)

S. 16 : Officers and employees, salary, allowances, etc-Termination of service of employee-State Government was not competent authority to refer industrial dispute against petitioners to Industrial Tribunal- Central Government has the jurisdiction-Award passed was set aside.[ Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 S. 2(a)(i)]

Duo Meadows (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 265 Taxman 221 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 281B : Provisional attachment-Pendency of appeal-Stay-Directed the revenue authorities not to enforce the order until a decision is taken by the appellate Authority on stay application filed by the assessee. [Art. 226]

Darius Sammotashaw v. DIT (Inv.) (2019) 265 Taxman 8 (Mag.) (Bom.)(HC)

S. 281B : Provisional attachment–Search-Attachment of bank accounts and two immoveable properties-Tax, interest penalties were unlikely to exceed attached two immoveable properties-Directed to lift provisional attachment on bank accounts. [S. 132]

Sajid Salimbhai Saiyed v. UOI (2019) 265 Taxman 191 (Guj.) (HC)

S. 281 : Certain transfers to be void–Attachment of property to recover the tax–Direction of TRO to hand over possession of property is stayed-Assessee directed to appear before TRO and adduce necessary evidence for discharging the liability. [Art. 226]

PCIT v. Prakashchandra S Soni, HUF (2019) 107 taxmann.com 86 / 265 Taxman 16 (Guj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Prakashchandra S Soni, HUF (2019) 265 Taxman 15 (SC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Sale of good will and Trade of firm is held to be taxable as capital gain-Deletion of penalty is held to be justified.[S. 28(i), 45]