Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Punjab Cricket Association v. ACIT( 2019) 183 DTR 217/ 202 TTJ 137 ( 2020) 180 DTR 347 (Chd)(Trib),www.itatonline.org

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes -Sports -Cricket – The commercial exploitation of the popularity of the game and the property/infrastructure held by the assessee is not incidental to the main object but is one of the primary motives of the assessee- Not entitle to exemption- Matter reamended to the file of the AO to ascertain the mutuality in respect of club income . [ S.2(15), 12A ]

DIT(E) v. Gujarat Cricket Association ( 2019) 419 ITR 561/ 184 DTR 97 /(2020) 314 CTR 297/(Guj)(HC),www.itatonline.org DIT ( E ) v. Baroda Cricket Association ( 2019) 419 ITR 561/ 184 DTR 97/(2020) 314 CTR 297 (Guj)(HC),www.itatonline.org DIT (E ) v. Saurashtra Cricket Association ( 2019) 419 ITR 561/ 184 DTR 97/ (2020) 314 CTR 297 (Guj)(HC),www.itatonline.org Editorial: Orders of Tribunal in Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT / Baroda Cricket Association v .JCIT, Saurashtra Cricket Association v.JCIT ( 2019) 202 TTJ 409 / 183 DTR 367( Ahd) (Trib) is affirmed .

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Charitable activities results in a surplus does not mean that assessee exists for profit- If the surplus is ploughed back into the same charitable activities, the assessee cannot be said to be carrying out commercial activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business- Entitle to exemption . [ S.2(15) 12, 12AA ]

Vijayattan Balkrishan Mittal v. DCIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum) (Trib).www. itatonline .org Mahendra B.Mittal HUF v .Dy CIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum.) (Trib.) www.itatonline.org Mahendra Balakrishan Mittal v .Dy .CIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum.) (Trib.) www.itatonline .org Pooja Mahendra Mittal v .Dy CIT ( 2020) 203 TTJ 288 (Mum.) (Trib.) www.itatonline .org

S. 10(38) : Long term capital gains from equities – Penny stocks- Burden is on the revenue to show with evidence the chain of events and live link of the assessee’s involvement in the scam including that he paid cash and in return received exempt Long term capital gains -Denial of exemption is held to be not jaustified-Addition cannot be made as unexplained income- Addition cannot be made on estimated commission for alleged accommodation entries . [ S.45 , 68,69C ]

Tata Communications Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (Mum)(Trib),www.itatonline.org

S. 2(7A) : Assessing Officer – Jurisdiction- The Addl CIT is an Assessing Officer, he can act as such only if there is a notification issued by the CBDT u/s 120(4)(b) or if there is an order u/s 127 transferring jurisdiction from the DCIT to the Addl CIT -In the absence of either, the assessment order is without jurisdiction and has to be quashed as null and void- No estoppel against the law- Additional ground of assessee on jurisdictional issue is allowed . [ S. 2(28c ),120(4) 127 , 254(1) ]

Summit India Water Treatment & Services Ltd. v. PCIT (2019) 177 ITD 770/ 182 DTR 185 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –
– Furnishing of Form 3CEB report electronically is mandatory as per Rule 12(2)- Revision order is held to be valid- For failure to deduct tax at source in respect of freight charges paid – Revision is held to be not valid . [ S.92E, 172 , 194C, 195 , R.12 , form 3CEB ]

CAE India (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 177 ITD 780 (Bang) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Method of accounting construction contract – Completion method – Allocation of expenses -Accounting standard AS-7 – Revision is held to be not justified .

Anil Kisanlal Marda. v. ITO (2019) 177 ITD 749 /182 DTR 153 / 201 TTJ 100(Pune) (Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Powers – Order passed with in month of conclusion of hearing , though dispatched after 3 months cannot be said to be null and void .

Pramod Sahai Bhatnagar, HUF v. ACIT (2019) 177 ITD 799 /182 DTR 10 / 202 TTJ 127(Jaipur) (Trib.)

S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence -Purchase of two adjacent flats – Could be treated as one residential house – Matter remanded for verification .[S.45 ]

Iscon Ceramic (P.) Ltd. v. Initiating Officer, (2019) 265 Taxman 364 (PBPTA – AT)

S. 2(12) : Beneficial Owner-Provisional attachment-Return of money on cancellation of order–Appellant cannot be held to be beneficial owner – Attachment of bank account was set aside. [S. 2(9), 24]

PCIT v. Shakti Foundation (2019) 107 taxmann.com 459/ 265Taxman 243 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP is granted to the revenue, PCIT v. Shakti Foundation (2019) 265 Taxman 242 (SC)

S. 271D : Penalty–Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Otherwise than by account payee cheque or account payee bank draft– Journal entries–Transaction bonafide–Not liable penalty.[S.269SS, 269T].