Year: 2019

Archive for 2019


CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 3) (2019) 416 ITR 554 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 80HHC : Export business-Deduction is allowable on the basis of finally assessed income.

CIT v. Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. (2019) 416 ITR 263 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 73 : Losses in speculation business-Non-Banking financial Institution advancing Loans and making investments-Not speculative transactions-Loss is allowable to be set off. [S. 28(i)]

CIT v. Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. (2019) 416 ITR 263 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Transactions found to be genuine—Deletion of addition is held to be justified.

CIT v. Malayil Bankers. (2019) 416 ITR 322 /( 2020) 185 DTR 347/ 314 CTR 568(Ker.)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-No explanation was furnished–Civil proceedings would not regulate the assessment under the Income-tax Act-Tribunal remanding the matter is held to be erroneous-Addition as cash credit is valid. [S. 254(1)]

Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 2) v. ACIT (2019) 416 ITR 539 (Ker.)(HC) CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 3) (2019) 416 ITR 554 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 43A : Rate of exchange-Foreign currency-Actual cost-Gains earned on cancellation of forward contracts-Capital in nature and liable to be capitalized towards cost of machinery. [S. 43(1)]

CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 4) (2019) 416 ITR 564 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Contribution to Employees welfare Trust–Allowable as business expenditure. [S. 36(1)(iv), 36(1)(v), 40A(9)]

CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No .2) (2019) 416 ITR 546 (Ker.) (HC) CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 3) (2019) 416 ITR 554 (Ker.) (HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Variation in quality or defective goods–No addition can be made-General expenses–Reduction of expenses–Rent to other companies–Same management– Commission paid to investment companies–Amount cannot be assessed in the hands of the assessee.[S. 4]

Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 2) v. ACIT (2019) 416 ITR 539 (Ker.)(HC) CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 2) (2019) 219 ITR 546 ( Ker.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Royalty-Disallowance of expenses to extent not attributable to previous year relevant to Assessment year is held to be proper–Entitle to deduction for the period in question.

Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 1) v. ACIT (2019) 416 ITR 523 / 183 DTR 163/ 311 CTR 981 (Ker.)(HC) CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 2) ( 2019) 416 ITR 546 / 311 CTR 981( Ker.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure–Right issue–Collaboration agreement–Year of allowability–Held allowable in the year of receipt of bill and approval-Club membership fee-Allowable as business expenditure. [S. 145]

Saboo Berlac Laboratories Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 416 ITR 389 (P&H)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Royalty paid as percentage of sales for obtaining technical Know how for setting up new business—Held to be capital expenditure.