Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Cheryl J. Patel v. Dy. CIT (2019) 76 ITR 5 (SN.) (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 45 : Capital Gains-Alleged bogus long-term capital gains–Order giving effect to the order of Tribunal-Direction-AO wrongly considered deposits twice against sale of shares-AO has no jurisdiction to look into sale of other shares-Addition is deleted. [S. 254(1)]

Shivacid India Private Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 76 ITR 76 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax-Remission or cessation of trading liability-No addition can be made if AO has not brought any evidence to show that liability has ceased to exist–No additions can be made unless liability has not been written off in books of accounts.[S. 145]

Global Connect Travels P. Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 75 ITR 226 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 40A(3) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits-Exceptions-Rule 6DD(k)-Payments during non-banking hours and at weekends for urgent hotel bookings and hotel staff refusing to accept cheque-AO has not considered the factual aspects -Matter remanded.[R. 6DD(k)]

Radius Industries v. ACIT (2019) 75 ITR 547 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 40(b)(ii) : Amounts not deductible–Partner–Remuneration-Partnership Deed mentioning maximum amount payable but payment to individual partner left undecided-Payments to be decided mutually between them- No disallowance made in preceding years-Principle of consistency applied. [S. 40(b)(v)]

DCIT v. Tecnotree Convergence Ltd. (2019) 75 ITR 505/( 2020) 205 TTJ 561 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident– Fees for Technical Services–Commission agents providing services outside India-Commission payments to non-residents not be treated as income deemed to accrue or arise in India-No disallowance could be made.

Eaton Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 75 ITR 675 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 40(a)(i): Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident– Royalty-Payment for purchase of copyrighted software-Not royalty- ‘Royalty’ originally defined in double taxation avoidance agreement not amended-Assessee is not liable to deduct tax for payments made for purchase of off-the-shelf software. [S. 9(1)(vi), 195]

Poddar Pigments Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 174 DTR 177 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident– Interest – Royalty-Fes for technical services-DTAA-India-Switzerland. [S.9(1)(vi), 195, Art.14]

Anurag Rastogi v. ITO (2019) 75 ITR 8 (Luck.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business Expenditure–Advertisement expenses-Assessee not confronted with fact that notices to parties to whom expenses claimed to have been paid returned unserved-Matter Remanded–AO to decide afresh after confronting assessee and after hearing assessee.

Cochin International Airport Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 76 ITR 44 (SN) (Cochin)(Trib.)

S. 37(i) : Business Expenditure-Provisions for gratuity and leave encashment made with reasonable certainty on basis of independent actuarial valuation same is allowable. [S. 145]

ACIT v. Central Park Infrastructure Development P. Ltd. (2019) 76 ITR 76 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Not commenced business operations-lease rentals is allowed to be set off against lease rentals paid as well as excess expenditure allowable for capitalization.