Year: 2020

Archive for 2020


Areva T & D India Ltd. v. CIT (2020) 428 ITR 1/ 195 DTR 361/ 317 CTR 633 (Mad)(HC)

S. 50B : Capital gains – Slump sale – Assets transferred to Subsidiary- Allotment of Shares — Scheme approved by High Court — Not slump sale for purposes of capital gains Tax — The transfer, pursuant to approval of a scheme of arrangement, was not a contractual transfer, but a statutorily approved transfer and could not be brought within the definition of the word sale -Claim which was not raised in return or revised return – Appellate authorities must consider the claim if facts are on record – No estoppel in taxation law – [ S.2(42C) 45 , 54EC , Companies Act , S. 393, 394, Transfer of property Act, 1882 S.118 , Sale of Goods Act , 1930 , S.2(10) ]

PCIT v. Gunnebo India Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 428 ITR 233 (Bom)(HC)

S.45 : Capital gains —Block of assets – Land and building —Valued separately — Held to be justified [ S. 2(11) ]

PCIT v. Solapur District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd ( 2019) 261 Taxman 476 /(2020) 428 ITR 306 (Bom)(HC) PCIT v. Laxmi Co-Operative Bank Ltd. ( 2019) 261 Taxman 476 / (2020) 428 ITR 306 (Bom)(HC)

S. 43D : Public financial institutions – Co-Operative Bank -Real income — Interest on non-performing assets cannot be taxed on accrual basis- Amendment should apply to pending matters [ S.80P(4) 145 ]

CIT v. Celebrity Fashion Ltd. (2020) 428 ITR 470 (Mad) (HC)

S. 43(5) : Speculative transaction -Exporter of cotton entering into forward contracts — Loss incurred is not a loss in speculative transaction —Entitled to deduction of loss [ S.28 (i ) ]

Vaduganathan Talkies v. ITO (2020) 428 ITR 224 / 275 Taxman 599(Mad) (HC)

S. 40A(3) :Expenses or payments not deductible – Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits -Banking facilities available — No Evidence of compelling circumstances justifying payments — Disallowance justified. [ R.6DD ]

Nam Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2020) 428 ITR 186/(2021 ) 277 Taxman 169 (Karn)(HC)

S. 40A(2): Expenses or payments not deductible – Excessive or unreasonable – No reasonable cause shown – Disallowance is held to be justified .

New Woodlands Hotel Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 428 ITR 492/ 274 Taxman 468/196 DTR 449 (Mad) (HC)

S.37(1 ) : Business expenditure — Service charges paid to employees in terms of agreement entered into under Industrial Disputes Act — Held to be allowable .[ Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, S 18(1) ]

Continuum Wind Energe (India) Pvt. Ltd. v .Dy. CIT (2020) 428 ITR 559 (Mad) (HC)

S.37(1):Business expenditure — Capital or revenue- Fluctuation in foreign exchange rates – Loan to purchase plant and machinery — Increase in liability – Capital expenditure.

CIT (LTU) v. SBI (2020) 428 ITR 316/ 194 DTR 259 (Karn)(HC)

S.37(1): Business expenditure — Bank — Purchase and sale of securities — Assessable as business income and not as income from other sources -Interest paid allowable as deduction [ S. 28(i), 36(i) (iii), 56 ]

CIT v. Sanmar Speciality Chemicals Ltd. (2020) 428 ITR 237/ ( 2021) 278 Taxman 94 (Mad) (HC)

S.32 : Depreciation — Unabsorbed depreciation — Carry forward and set off —Amendment ,Finance Act of 2001- Circular No. 14 of 2001 dt.9 -11 -2001- No time limit for carry forward and set off [ S.32(2) ]