Year: 2019

Archive for 2019


Kailash Swaroop Agarwal v. CIT (2018) 409 ITR 210 (Raj.)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits—Credit entries in bank account is not explained satisfactorily–Genuineness of transaction is not proved -Order of Tribunal confirming the addition is held to be justified. [S. 69A]

CIT v. Eco Auto Components Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 202 (P&H) (HC)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax – Remission or cessation of trading liability -Liability continued to be shown in balance-sheet — Addition cannot be made as deemed income.

CIT v. Eco Auto Components Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 202 (P&H) (HC)

S. 36(1)(vii) : Bad debt–Sums written off in books of an assessee is sufficient to claim the bad debt and assessee is not required to prove the recoverability of debt.

Unifac Management Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 409 ITR 225/ (2019) 260 Taxman 60/ 175 DTR 5 / 307 CTR 168 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 36(1)(va) : Any sum received from employees–EPF-ESI-Contribution from employees has to be paid within due date as per particular enactment-Disallowance is held to be justified. [S. (2924)(x), 43B]

CIT v. Eco Auto Components Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 202 (P&H)(HC)

S. 35DDA : Amortisation of expenditure – Voluntary retirement scheme -Deduction relating to Financial Year 2000-01, Being Fifth Year deduction is available.

CIT v. Goldman Sachs Services P. Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 268 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income – No disallowance can be made when the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year. [R. 8D]

K. S. Chaudhary and others v. Life Insurance Corporation Of India (2018) 409 ITR 258 (Delhi)(HC) Rajesh Kumar Gupta v. Senior Divisional Manager , Life Insurance Corporation of India (2018) 409 ITR 258 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 10(14) : Special allowance or benefit-Employees of Life Insurance Corporation-Fixed conveyance allowance, additional conveyance allowance and expenses under head reimbursement of expenses scheme is entitled to exemption-Tax deducted at source to be reimbursed to the employees and benefit under S.89 to be extended on reimbursement of deduced amount. [S.10(14)(ii), 89, 192, R. 2BB]

A. Sridevi ( Smt) v. ITO (2018) 408 ITR 83/ 171 DTR 417/ 305 CTR 670 /( 2019) 260 Taxman 76 (Mad) (HC) Editorial: Affirmed by division Bench, A. Sridevi ( Smt) v. ITO (2018) 409 ITR 502 //( 2019) 260 Taxman 181 ( Mad) (HC)

S. 147 : Reassessment -Second reassessment -New tangible material was found- Reassessment is valid [ S. 148, 149(1)(b ) ]

Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Ltd v. Dy.CIT ( 2018) 172 DTR 291/ ( 2019) 307 CTR 582 ( Bom) (HC)

S. 264 :Commissioner – Revision of other orders -Condonation of delay – Commission paid was claimed as deduction in the AY. 2013-14- Assessing Officer held that the Commissioner pertaining to AY. 2012-13 hence not allowed – Revision application was filed for the AY. 2012-13 , with in one month of the order for the AY.2013-14-PCIT rejected the petition on the ground that it was time barred – On writ the delay was condoned and the PCIT is directed to dispose the application on merits .[ S.143(3)]

Kanta Sharma v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (2018) 259 Taxman 376 (Delhi)( HC)

Chartered Accountants Act, 1949,
S.10: Failure to append her signatures at places earmarked therefor in nomination form, petitioner’s nomination was rightly rejected by ICAI for non-compliance of statutory rules 9, 10 and 11 of Chartered Accountants (Election to Council) Rules, 2006 and petitioner could not contest election- Petition is dismissed .[ Rules, 9, 10, 11]