Year: 2020

Archive for 2020


PCIT v. Sygenta Bioscience (P) Ltd. (2020) 268 Taxman 422 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 48 : Capital gains–Cost of acquisition-Refundable deposit– Relinquishment of rights–If refundable deposit is considered as sale consideration-Refundable deposit is to be considered as cost of acquisition. [S. 45]

CIT v. Army Wives Welfare Association, Lucknow (2020) 185 DTR 395 / 312 CTR 375/ 271 Taxman 139/ 116 taxmann.com 215 (All.)(HC)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source– Interest, commission-When exemption u/s.11 is denied the assessee is liable to deduct tax at source – Addition made by the AO is held to be justified. [S. 10(23AA), 11, 12A, 13]

CIT v. Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd. (2019) 112 taxmann.com 386 (2020) / 421 ITR 525268 Taxman 396 (Mad.)( HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed ; CIT v. Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd [2019] 416 ITR (St.) 77 /. (2020) 268 Taxman 395 (SC)

S. 36(1)(viia) : Bad debt-Provision for bad and doubtful debts- Schedule bank-Entitle to set off though dis not have any positive profit to set off.

Sharan Hospitality (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 268 Taxman 443 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 23 : Income from house property-Annual value-Property which is not legally occupiable and not occupied-Could not be made liable to tax on notional rental income for that period. [S. 22]

CIT v. Army Wives Welfare Association. (2020) 185 DTR 395 / 312 CTR 375/ 271 Taxman 139/ 116 taxmann.com 215 (All.)(HC)

S. 10(23AA) : Funds established for welfare of employees – Failed to prove income on behalf of regimental fund or non-public fund established by the armed forces of the Union- Denial of exemption is held to be justified. – Marginal rate to be applied to total income . [S. 11, 13 ,148, 164 ]

Kamal Kumar Kalia v. UOI (2020) 268 Taxman 398 /187 DTR 433/ 313 CTR 779(Delhi) (HC)

S. 10(10AA) : Leave salary–Government employee-Leave salary- Employee of the Central Government or State Government- Retired employees of PSUs and nationalised bank cannot be treated as Government employees-Not entitled to get full tax exemption on leave encashment after retirement/superannuation. [Art. 12, 226]

Rolls Royce Plc v. Dy.CIT (2020) 185 DTR 113 / 312 CTR 158 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Fixed place of business-liable to be assessed in India- DTAA-India-UK. [Art. 5(1), 5(2), 5(4)]

Good Home Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2019) 184 DTR 362 (2020) 312 CTR 102 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income–Quantum appeal is pending–Petition to quash the proceedings before the magistrate court is dismissed. [S. 139(1), Art. 226, 227]

CIT v. Fomento Fianance & Investment (P) Ltd. (2019) 183 DTR 340 / (2020) 312 CTR 88 / 421 ITR 146 / 272 Taxman 171 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Substantial question of law on jurisdictional issue is framed at the time of final hearing of appeal and the order of Assessing Officer is quashed for not issuing the mandatory notice u/s.143(2) of the Act. [S. 158BB, 158C, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908)]

Tata Communications Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2019) 183 DTR 26 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 245 : Refunds-Set off of refunds against tax remaining payable-AO cannot deviate the mandate of the S.245–Adjustment of refund is held to be bad in law-Department is directed refund the refund.