Year: 2020

Archive for 2020


P.H. Kumar & Co. v. ITO ( 2019) CTCJ-September-P. 96 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 28(i) : Business loss-Shortage of goods –Running of show room-Franchise agreement-Payment made to the company–Loss is held to be allowable. [S. 37(i)]

A. Harish Bhat v. ACIT ( 2019) 111 taxmann.com 210/ ( 2020) 269 Taxman 218 / 317 CTR 957 / 195 DTR 105 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 2(35) : Principal officer-Notice must mention some connection with the management or administration of the company–Merely on surmises and conjectures, no person shall be treated as a Principal officer. [Art. 226]

CIT v. Siemens Nixdorf Information Systemse Gmbh (2019) BCAJ-October-P. 63 (Bom.)(HC)

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

Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy v. ITO (2020) 180 ITD 305 (Cochin)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue–Kuri business–Profit making activity-Not incidental to attainment of objects of trust-Revision is held to be valid. [S.2(15), 11(4), 12A]

Shardaben B. Patel. (Smt.) v. PCIT ( 2019) 75 ITR 13/ (2020) 180 ITD 328 / 190 DTR 228/ 204 TTJ 231 (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue–Long term capital gain-Information from DIT (Inv)–All relevant documents in relation to LTCG which reflected occurrence of transaction of sale of shares in normal course on platform of stock exchange-Revision is held to be not valid. [S.10(38), 45]

Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 180 ITD 300 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 234D : Interest on excess refund–Deduction of tax at source-Refund granted for earlier period was adjusted against outstanding demand of relevant year–No interest is leviable. [S. 234B]

Mahapalika Kshetra Madhyamik Shikshak Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit v. ITO (2020) 180 ITD 267 / 188 DTR 23/ 204 TTJ 92(Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 80P : Co-operative societies–Financial assistance to members- Not registered as bank by RBI cannot be categorised as a co -operative bank -Not be hit by provisions of S.80P(4)-Entitle to deduction.-Matter remanded to CIT ( A) [S. 80P(2)(a)(i)Banking Regulation Act , 1949 ,]

Manhattan Associates (India) Development Centre (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 180 ITD 257 / 203 TTJ 1015/ 187 DTR 105(Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 80JJAA : Employment of new workmen–Rendering software development services-Regarded as an industrial undertaking engaged in manufacture of article or thing-Eligible for deduction.

Emmsons International Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 180 ITD 292 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Foreign travel expenses-Foreign travel of wives and children of directors-Not allowable as revenue expenditure

DCIT v. Honda Cars India Ltd. (2020) 180 ITD 235 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure–Capital or revenue–Royalty-Technical know-how payment to secure technical know how–Held to be revenue expenditure.