Year: 2020

Archive for 2020


Belmarks Metal Works v. ITO (2020) 80 ITR 699 ( Delhi) (Trib)

S. 69C: Unexplained expenditure – Bogus purchases — source of purchase not outside books of account and corresponding sales not disputed — Books of account not rejected – Only profit element can be added – Reassessment is held to be valid [ S.37 , 143(3) 147 , 148 ]

Satya Narayan Choudhary v. A CIT (2020) 80 ITR 95( Jodh) (Trib)

S. 69 :Unexplained investments – Search and seizure – Construction activities – Retraction of statement – Addition is held to be not valid[ [S.69A 132(4) ]

Bhagwatiben Vinodkumar Surani v .ITO (2020) 80 ITR 341) (Ahd) (Trib)

S.68: Cash credits —Long-term capital gains – Sale of shares —Penny stock – Purchases in physical form – Dematerialised subsequently — Addition is held to be justified [ S.10 (38) 45 ]

G. Ashok Reddy v .ITO (2020) 80 ITR 550 ( Hyd) (Trib)

S.68: Cash credits – Family settlement – Source of receipt accepted —Addition is held to be not justified .

Rajiv Madhok v. ACIT (2020)80 ITR 427 184 ITD 378 ( Delhi) (Trib)

S.54F : Capital gains- Investment in a residential house -Purchased within two years from the date of transfer of original asset —Entitled to exemption [ S. 45 ]

Kasi Viswanathan Ramanathan v. ITO (2020) 80 ITR 461 ( Chennai )(Trib)

S.54F : Capital gains- Investment in a residential house – Failure to deposit unutilised portion of consideration in capital gains scheme — Procedural requirement — Benefit cannot be denied [ S.45 , 54(2)]

Sunil Malhotra v. ACIT (2020) 80 ITR 372 ( Delhi) (Trib)

S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence –
As on date of transfer of original asset – Not owning more than one residential house — Capital gains deposited in capital gains savings account — Completion of construction within two years from date of sale of original asset —Entitled to exemption[ S.45, 54F ]

Bhagwan Swaroop Pathak v. ITO (2020) 80 ITR 89( Delhi) (Trib)

S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence -New property acquired in Son’s name —Exemption cannot be denied [ S.45 ]

Alka Jain (Smt.) v. ACIT (2020) 80 ITR 464 ( Delhi) (Trib)

S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation – Assessable – With effect from 1-10-2009 prospective in nature- Deemed sale consideration of Rs. 1.56 crores could not be invoked. [ S.45 , 48 ]

R. Rosalin Vasanthi ( Smt.) v. ITO (2020) 80 ITR 525 (Chennai) (Trib)

S.48 :Capital gains — Cost of acquisition — Valuation of land and building —Property let out -Valuation should be on basis of rent capitalisation method [ S.45 ]