Year: 2020

Archive for 2020


PCIT v .Morgan Stanley India Securities P Ltd (Bom)(HC)(UR)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income – When there is no exempt income declared during the year no disallowance can be made .[ R.8D(2) (ii) ]

PCIT v Khoinoor Project Pvt Ltd ( 2020) 425 ITR 700 / (2021) 276 Taxman 180 (Bom) (HC)

S. 14A: Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income – When there is no exempt income declared during the year no disallowance can be made. [R. 8D (2) (ii) ]

CIT(E) v. Matoshri Arts & Sports Trust. (Bom) (HC) (UR) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed (SLP No.17828 of 2019 dt.26/07/2019)(2019) 416 ITR 127 (St.)(SC)

S.11: Exemptions – Trust was not engaged in running the restaurant, bar etc. – Exemption is held to be allowable.

CIT v. Siemens Nixdorf Information Systems Gmbh (2020) 114 taxmann.com 531 (Bom)(HC) Editorial : SLP oof Revenue dismissed , CIT (IT) v. Siemens Nixdorf Information Systemse Gmbh (2023)453 ITR 741 / 293 Taxman 1 (SC)

S.2 (14)(a): Capital asset –Advance given to subsidiary – Loss – Held to be allowable as short term capital loss [S. 2(42A) ,2(47)]

Rajesh Ajjavara v. ITO (TDS) (2020) 77 ITR 14 (SN) (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 271F : Penalty-Return of income-Failure to furnish – Refund return-Penalty is not leviable. [S.139(4), 244A]

Savita S. Gangadshetti (Smt.) v. JCIT (2020) 77 ITR 79 (SN) (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 271D : Penalty–Takes or accepts any loan or deposit–Gift transactions between husband and wife-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid. [S. 269SS, 269T, 271E, 273B]

Gourang Chandra Nayak v. Jt. CIT (2020) 77 ITR 192 (SN) (Cuttack) (Trib.)

S. 271D : Penalty–Takes or accepts any loan or deposit–Money returned to father–Receipt of money from family members for medical emergency–Receipt of money from member of association for building school-Neither loan or advances–Levy of penalty is held to be not justified. [S. 269SS, 273B]

Mukti Roy (Smt.) v. ITO (2020)77 ITR 20 (SN) (Kol.) (Trib.)

S. 271B : Penalty-Failure to get accounts audited-Not maintaining books of account-Penalty for not getting books audited could not be levied –Penalty for failure to maintain books of account is restricted to Rs. 25000. [S. 44AB, 271A]

Harshvardhan v. Dy. CIT (2020)77 ITR 81 (SN) / 195 DTR 145/ 206 TTJ 894 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 271B : Penalty-Failure to get accounts audited–Civil contractor– Failure to keep and maintain books of account-No prescribed format for maintenance of books of account-Levy of penalty is not justified either u/s 271A or u/s 271B of the Act. [S. 44AB, 271A]

Harshvardhan v. Dy. CIT (2020) 77 ITR 81 (SN)/ 195 DTR 145/ 206 TTJ 894 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 271AAB : Penalty-Search initiated on or after Ist day of July 2012-In statement admits undisclosed income and specifies manner in which such income derived-No undisclosed income-Penalty not leviable. [S. 132(4)]