Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


ACIT v. Vishnu Pouch Packaging P. Ltd. (2020) 77 ITR 10 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Trade mark licence utilisation fees based on turnover-Held to be revenue expenditure.

Dy.CIT v. Mahavir Multitrade P. Ltd. (2020) 77 ITR 165 /180 ITD 730/ 192 DTR 257/ 206 TTJ 640 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Compensation for not complying with terms of contract-Civil consequence for not complying with certain terms of contract and had nothing to do with any offence- No violation of law–No disallowances can be made by applying the explanation 1.

CIT v. Siemens Nixdorf Information Systemse Gmbh ( 2019) 184 DTR 277 ( Bom) (HC)

S.45: Capital gains- Capital loss- Assignement of loan- Capital asset – Allowable as capital loss. [ S. 2(14)(a) , 2 (47), Wealth tax Act , 1957 S. 2( e ). ]

PCIT v. Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd ( 2020) 185 DTR 390 /113 taxmann.com 303 ( Bom) (HC) Editorial : Notice issued in SLP filed by revenue , PCIT v. Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd ( 2021 ) 281 Taxman 365 ( SC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income – Recording of satisfaction – AO needs to record his non-satisfaction having regard to the sou motu disallowances claimed by the assessee in the context of its accounts. It is only thereafter, the occasion to apply rule 8D of the Rules for apportionment of expenses can arise- AO discussing and not accepting is not sufficient -Order of Tribunal is affirmed . [S.14A(2) , R.8D ]

Kuthannur Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. ITO (2020) 420 ITR 358 / 180 DTR 313/ 312 CTR 465/ 271 Taxman 118 (Ker)(HC) Peringottukurussi Service Co -Operative Bank Ltd v .ITO ( 2020) 420 ITR 358 / 180 DTR 313/ 312 CTR 465/ 271 Taxman 118 (Ker)(HC) Vadakkenchery Service Co -operative Bank Ltd v .ITO ( 2020) 420 ITR 358 / 180 DTR 313/ 312 CTR 465 / 271 Taxman 118(Ker)(HC)

S. 80P : Co-operative societies -CBDT – Binding precedent – Clarificatory circulars for guidance of Government Officers is not binding on Tribunal- Circulars issued by a Government Department cannot have any primacy over the decision of the jurisdictional High Court-Not entitle to deduction . [ S.80P(2) ,119 ]

Ivan Singh v. ACIT (2020) 422 ITR 128/ 195 DTR 227/ 272 Taxman 36/ ( 2021 )) 322 CTR 851 (Bom)(HC) www.itatonline.org

S. 143(3) : Assessment –Ad-hoc addition- Labour charges – On facts the High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal. [ S.260A ]

Ivan Singh v. ACIT (2020) 422 ITR 128 / 195 DTR 227/ 272 Taxman 36/ ( 2021) 322 CTR 851 (Bom)(HC)(Goa Bench), www.itatonline.org

S. 68 : Cash credits -The expression “any previous year” does not mean all previous years but the previous year in relation to the assessment year concerned- If the cash credits are credited in the FY 2006-07, it cannot be brought to tax in a later AY.2009-10[ S.3 ]

Shri. Dhar Sabha Vaishno Devi v. CIT(E) (TM ) Amristar) (Trib),www.itatonline.org

S. 12A : Registration –Trust or institution- Object clause-Registration cannot be refused on the ground that the Trust Deed does not contain “dissolution clause” and not registering with the Registrar of Societies . [ S.2(15) ,11, 12AA ]

Tata Communications Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 311 CTR 407 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 245 : Refunds- Set off of refunds against tax remaining payable – Refund cannot be adjusted without prior notice is issued – Order adjustment of refund is quashed .[ Art. 226 ]

Vodafone Idea Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 311 CTR 385 / 267 Taxman 603 /( 2020) 421 ITR 253 (Bom.)(HC). Editorial : SLP of revenue was dismissed on the ground of delay , Dy.CIT v. Vodafone Idea Ltd ( 2021 )) 283 Taxman 272/ 283 Taxman 8 (SC)

S.241A: Withholding of refund in certain cases – Declaring the loss cannot be the ground to doubt the contents of the return or the loss suffered by the assessee – Directed to refund the amount with the interest with in the period of three weeks from the receipt of the order . [ S.143(ID), 197, Art .226 ]