Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Sri Aurobindo Ashram Harpagaon Workshop Trust v. DCIT (2019) 415 ITR 247 (Mad.)( HC)

S. 80HHC : Export business-Total turnover-Entire turnover of business – Donation for scientific research cannot be excluded. [S.35(1)(ii), 80GGA]

CIT v. Kulwinder Singh (2019) 415 ITR 49/ 311 CTR 233 (P&H) (HC)

S. 69B : Amounts of investments not fully disclosed in books of account –Addition is held to be not justified solely on the basis of photocopy of agreement between two other persons which was seized during search of third party. [S. 132, 513A]

CIT v. Harri Joseph (2019) 415 ITR 181 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Capital gains-Sale of property-Part of sale consideration credited in assessee’s account–Addition as income from undisclosed source is held to be justified. [S. 45]

CIT v. T. B. Kunhimahin Haji and others. (2019) 415 ITR 491 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash Credits-Source of fund explained–Burden discharged -Deletion of addition is held to be justified.

C. V. Sunny. v. CIT (2019) 415 ITR 127/ 179 DTR 115/ 309 CTR 291/ 265 Taxman 19 (Mag.) (Ker.)(HC)

S. 55A : Capital gains-Reference to valuation officer-Cost of acquisition-Filing valuation report-Refusal to make reference to valuation officer is not proper-Matter remitted to Assessing Officer for reference to valuation officer. [S. 45]

Sunil Bansal v. ACIT (2019) 415 ITR 236/ 267 Taxman 87 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of assessee dismissed , Sunil Bansal v. CIT (2022) 287 Taxman 175/113 CCH 172 (SC)/ Review petition dismissed, Sunil Bansal v. CIT (2022) 288 Taxman 650 (SC)

S.28(i) Business income- : Capital Gains-Capital asset-Agricultural land-Purchase lands from land owners, convert them for non-agricultural use and sell them to companies-Property sold was not capital asset- Assessable as business income . [S. 2(14), 45 ]

CIT v. Parry and Co. Ltd. (2019) 415 ITR 45 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 45 : Capital gains-Capital loss-Loss incurred on account of sale of shares to sister concern-Neither fraudulent nor colourable device-Allowable as capital loss. [S. 260A]

PCIT v. Rajesh Prakash Timblo (2019) 415 ITR 334/ (2020) 185 DTR 34/ 313 CTR 91 (Bom.)(HC) PCIT v. Vidya Rajesh Timlo (2019) 415 ITR 334/(2020) 185 DTR 34 / 313 CTR 91 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Year of allowability of expenditure-Method of accounting-Rate of tax is same in both assessment years-Question academic-No question of law. [S. 145, 260A]

CIT v. Kongarar Spinners Ltd. (2019) 415 ITR 103 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Manufacture of yarn-Replacement of old machinery by purchase and installation of new machinery-Not allowable as revenue expenditure.

Malti Gupta (Smt.) v. CIT (2019) 415 ITR 168 (P&H)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure—Commission paid to persons who have referred the students–Disallowance of 50% of commission is held to be justified.