Year: 2019

Archive for 2019


CIT v. Sadiq Sheikh (2018) 100 taxmann.com 9 / 259 Taxman 423 / 197 DTR 191/ 318 CTR 382 (Bom.)(HC)/CIT v. Sadia Sheikh (2020) 429 ITR 163 / 122 taxmann.com 39 /(2021)276 Taxman 292/ 197 DTR 191/ 318 CTR 382 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed; CIT v. Sadiq Sheikh (2018) 259 Taxman 422 (SC)

S. 69 : Unexplained investments–Undisclosed sales of flats -Sale proceeds never came in to possession of the assessee-Deletion of addition is held to be justified.

J.J. Development (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 100 taxmann.com 101 / 259 Taxman 415 (Cal.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of assessee is dismissed, J.J. Development (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 259 Taxman 414 (SC)

S. 68 : Cash credits -Share capital–Documents were not produced– Addition is held to be justified.

PCIT v. Himachal Fibers Ltd. (2018) 98 taxmann.com 172 / 259 Taxman 4 (Delhi) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed. PCIT v. Himachal Fibers Ltd. (2018) 259 Taxman 3 (SC)

S. 68 : Cash credits–Share application money–AO has not conducted any enquiry–Addition on surmises is held to be not justified.

J.M.J. Essential Oil Company v. CIT (2018) 259 Taxman 546/( 2019) 307 CTR 88/ 415 ITR 17/ 174 DTR 361 (HP)(HC) Editorial: SLP of assessee is dismissed , J.M.J. Essential Oil Company v. CIT ( 2020) 269 Taxman 202 (SC)

S. 68 : Cash credits–Un explained cas h sales of Rs .3.12 crores only one month–Not explained satisfactorily–Addition is held to be justified.

PCIT v. Montage Enterprises (P.) Ltd. (2018) 100 taxmann.com 99 / 259 Taxman 418 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed; PCIT v. Montage Enterprises (P.) Ltd. (2018) 259 Taxman 417 (SC)

S. 68 : Cash credits–Trade advances-Adjusted against sales made in subsequent years-Deletion of addition is held to be justified.

PCIT v. Vaidya Panalalmanilal (HUF) (2018) 259 Taxman 19 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence- Consideration that arose in hands of HUF on sale of capital asset had been invested for purchase of new residential house in name of some of its members instead of assessee (HUF)-Entitle to exemption. [S. 45]

Rajasthan State Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 100 taxmann.com 152 / 259 taxman 512 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP is granted to the assessee and stay of operation of the impugned judgement and order of the High Court , Rajasthan State Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 259 Taxman 511 (SC).

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax-Remission or cessation of trading liability–Banking business-Amount transferred to statutory reserve out of carried forward account of provision for expenses was treated as taxable. [S. 80P(2)]

PCIT v. Green Delhi BQS Ltd. (2018) 259 Taxman 153 / 175 DTR 131/ 307 CTR 797/2019) 417 ITR 162 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure–Business of developing, maintaining and operating of Bus-Q-Shelters (BQS), metro stations, highways etc.–Encashment of bank guarantee–Allowable as business expenditure.

Satish Yashwant Kulkarni v. UOI (2018) 259 Taxman 489 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure–Pendency of constitutional validity of proviso to Rule 9A- Matter remanded to CIT(A) to decide on merits. [R. 9A]

PCIT v. International Biotech Park Ltd. (2018) 259 Taxman 14 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 36(1)(iii) : Interest on borrowed capital-loan was used for acquiring or construction of assets that were used for earning taxable income- Interest expenditure is held to be allowable.