Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Ravi Agarwal v. UOI (2019) 410 ITR 399/173 DTR 194 / 306 CTR 177/ 260 Taxman 352( SC)

S. 80DD : Medical treatment of dependent–Disability–Observations-Jeevan Aadhar-Amount of annuity under the policy is to be released only after the death of the person assured -Purpose is to secure the future of the person suffering from disability , after the death of the parent / guardian–Provision is valid in law -Considering the several difficult situations where the handicapped person may need the payment on annuity or lumpsum basis even during the life time of their parents / guardians, it is for the legislature to take care of theses aspects and to provide suitable provision by making necessary amendments in S.80DD. [Art. 14]

PCIT v. Solapur District Central Co -Op. Bank Ltd.( 2019) 261 Taxman 476 (2020) 428 ITR 306 (Bom.)(HC)/PCIT v. Laxmi Co-Operative Bank Ltd. ( 2019) 261 Taxman 476 / (2020) 428 ITR 306 (Bom)(HC)

S. 43D : Public financial institutions-Co-Operative Bank–Non performing assets (NPA)-Accrual of interest income- Provision is applicable to Co -Operative Societies–Amount transferred to overdue interest Reserve (OIR) by debiting the interest received in profit and loss account, cannot be assessed on accrual basis. [S. 145]

PCIT v. Laxmi Co -Operative Bank Ltd. (Bom.)(HC) (UR )

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Amortized premium on investment in govt .Securities held under category “Held to Maturity”) (HTM) is held to be revenue expenditure.

CIT(E) v. Deccan Education Society ( 2019)173 DTR 323 / 306 CTR 525(Bom.) (HC)

S. 10(23C) : Educational institution- Exemption cannot be denied on the ground that in isolated case few institutions run by the Trust may not fulfil the requirements. [S. 10 (23C)(iiiab)]

Sadhana R.Jain v CBDT ( 2019) 174 DTR 385/ 307 CTR 207 / 103 taxmann.com 70 (Bom) (HC) Editorial order of High Court set aside , Sadhana R. Jain v. CBDT (2022) 287 Taxman 562 (SC)

Income Declaration Scheme 2016 (IDS) -Finance Act , 2016 ( 2016) 381 ITR 134 (St) (S. 178 to 196) , ( 2016) 384 ITR 165 (St)- ( Refer AIFTPJ. July 2016 )

S.195: Power to remove difficulties- Not depositing the first instalment with in time – Board refusing to condonation of delay – Concession and excess indulgence would demotivating effect on honest taxpayers making regular and prompt tax deposit -Dismissal of application is held to be justified [ S.184, ITA, S.119 Art.14 ]

Rasna P. Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 63 ITR 28 (SN)(Ahd) (Trib)

S.37(1): Business expenditure — Provision for damaged goods -Held to be allowable .

Rasna P. Ltd. v. DCIT (2018)63 ITR 28 (SN)(Ahd) (Trib)

S.28(i):Business Loss — Soft drinks — Product having limited shelf Life —Non useable or non saleable which was destroyed – Allowable as business loss .

Rasna P. Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 63 ITR 28 (SN)(Ahd) (Trib)

S.28(i): Business loss — Litigation and bona fide dispute about goods at Bangladesh border – Foreseeable Loss — Held to be allowable . [ S.37(1), 145 ]

Kayvanbhai Surendrabhai Huttheesingh v. ITO (2018) 63 ITR 17 (SN) (SMC)(Ahd) (Trib)

S. 54F : Capital gains – Investment in a residential house -Investment in new asset is greater than capital gains -Partly out of sale proceeds and partly with bank Loan —Exemption is available [ S.45 ]

DCIT v. Sandvik Information Technology AB (2018) 63 ITR 19 (SN)(Pune) (Trib)

S. 147 : Reassessment -No tangible material- Reassessment is held to be not valid [ S.148 ]