Year: 2020

Archive for 2020


Raj Dadarkar & Associates v. ACIT (2017) 394 ITR 592/248 Taxman 1/298 CTR 117/157 DTR 225 (SC)

S. 22: Income from house property-Business income-The objects clause is not determinative- Income earned from sub-licenses is required to be taxed under the head “Income from House Property”. [S. 27(iii)(b),28(i), 269UA(f)]

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640/164 DTR 1/254 Taxman 325/301 CTR 489(SC) PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala (2018) 402 ITR 640/164 DTR 1/254 Taxman 325/301 CTR 489 (SC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income – Stock in trade – Controlling interest – Principle of apportionment – Only that expenditure which is “in relation to” earning dividends can be disallowed – AO has to record proper satisfaction on why the claim of the assessee as to the quantum of suo moto disallowance is not correct. [S. 36(1)(iii), Rule. 8D]

CIT (E) v. Subros Educational Society (2018) 303 CTR 1/166 DTR 257 //96 taxmann.com 652(SC)/Editrial: Review petition of Revenue dismissed , CIT (E) v. Subros Educational Society (2022) 286 Taxman 97 (SC)

S. 11: Property held for charitable purposes – Application of income – Any excess expenditure incurred by the trust/charitable institution in earlier assessment year could be allowed to be set off against income of subsequent years. [S.11(1)(a)]

GVK Industries Ltd. v. ITO (2011) 332 ITR 130/239 CTR 113/197 Taxman 337/52 DTR 1/162 Comp. Case 574 (SC) (Constitution Bench – i.e. Bench of 5 Judges)

S. 9(1)(vii): Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Fees for technical services – Validity challenged – Parliament’s power to legislate having extra – territorial effect.

Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v. UOI (2012) 341 ITR 1/204 Taxman 408/247 CTR 1/66 DTR 265/6 SCC 613/Vol. 42 Tax L R 305 (SC)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Indirect transfers – Transfer of shares – Foreign company – Jurisdiction – Off shore transaction tax authorities in India has no jurisdiction to tax such share transfer – Tax planning vs Tax avoidance – Subsidiary and Holding company relationships – Other business considerations [ S. 2(14) 2(47), 5(2) 163 , 195 ]

DIT (IT) v. Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. (2020) 426 ITR 1/192 DTR 1/315 CTR 622/272 Taxman 366 (SC)

S. 9(1)(i): Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Business connection – Income attributable to permanent establishment – For applicability of article 5(1) of DTAA it should be an establishment through which business of an enterprise is wholly or partly carried on and further profits of foreign enterprise are taxable only where said enterprise carries on its ‘core business’ through PE – Project office in India cannot be construed as fixed place as no core activity took place from its office in India Deletion of addition by the High Court is affirmed – DTAA- India – Republic of Korea [ Art.5 (1), 7 ]

UOI v. U.A.E. Exchange Centre (2020) 425 ITR 30/315 CTR 129/273 Taxman 122/ 190 DTR 79 (SC)

S. 5: Scope of total income – liaison office of the non-resident – A liaison office which is only carrying on such activity of a “preparatory or auxiliary” character is not a Permanent Establishment in terms of Article 5 of the Double taxation Avoidance Agreement – The deeming provisions in Sections 5 and 9 of the 1961 Act can have no bearing whatsoever- DTAA-India-UAE [S. 2(24) , 4 , 9(1)(i) ,90 , Art , 5 , 7 ]

CWT v. Estate of HMM Vikramsinhji of Gondal (2014) 363 ITR 679/225 Taxman 166/268 CTR 232/103 DTR 211 (SC)

S. 5: Scope of total Income – Accrual of income of discretionary trust – Income retained by the trustee cannot be brought tax in the assessment of beneficiary. [Wealth-tax Act, 1957, section 3]

Rampal Hooda v ITO ( 2020) BCAJ -April – 34 ( Delhi ) (Trib)

Interpretation of taxing statutes – Binding precedent – Two conflicting decision of different High Court – Transfer of case – Jurisdictional High Court decision will be binding on the Assessing Officer .

Rampal Hooda v ITO ( 2020) BCAJ -April – 34 ( Delhi ) (Trib)

Interpretation of taxing statutes – Binding precedent – Two conflicting decision of different High Court – Transfer of case – Jurisdictional High Court decision will be binding on the Assessing Officer .