Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


CIT(E) v. Managing Committee, Arya High School (2018) 304 CTR 548 / 168 DTR 257 (P&H)(HC)

S. 10(23C) : Educational institution–Accumulation income-Educational purposes-Assessee-school’s utilization of the amount of receipts (exceeding one crore) for purchase of land for further extension of school building, is to be considered for educational purpose only, hence, exemption is eligible.[S.10(23C)(vi)]

ACIT v .Harbans lal sethi (2018)196 TTJ 23 (UO) /53 CCH 552 ( Jaipur ) (Trib)

S.271(1)( c ): Penalty – Concealment – Undisclosed income surrendered during survey not included in the return- Tax was paid – Bonafide mistake – Deletion of penalty is held to be justified .[S.133A ]

ACIT v. Crayons Advertising Ltd. (2018) 68 ITR 77 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib)

S.68: Cash credits –Sale of car-Resale of car-Purchase was not doubted –On resale to from whom the car was purchased- Addition is held to be not justified .[ S.32 ]

Agfa Healthcare N.V. v Dy.CIT (2018) 172 DTR 153/196 TTJ 690 ( Mum) (Trib)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Royalty –Amount paid by AE for sale of software is not royalty -Right to use copy right –Matter remanded -DTAA-India –Belgium [ S.90 ,Art ,12(3) ]

DCIT v Joint Secretary Organizing Committee for Winter Games, 2009 (2018) 196 TTJ 975/54 CCH 84 / 68 ITR 14 (SN)(2019) 173 DTR 122 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 271C : Penalty-Failure to deduct at source–It is necessary to establish ‘contumacious conduct’ on the part of the assessee for failure to deduct tax at source for levy of penalty – Penalty was deleted. [S. 194C]

Dy.CIT v. Manish Agarwala (2018) 167 DTR 369 / 194 TTJ 346 (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 271AAB : Penalty where search has been initiated–Assessee recorded profits from sale of commodities in ‘other documents’ maintained in normal course, which were retrieved during search, penalty could not be levied.[S. 44AA(2), 132]

DCIT v. Jainco Developers Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 64 ITR 458 / 52 CCH 575 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 271AAA : Penalty-If no search has taken place in premises of assessee – All conditions laid down fulfilled–Deletion of penalty is held to be justified. [S. 132, 153C]

Dy. CIT v. MCML Train Control Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 63 ITR 144 (Chennai)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Preferring incorrect claim by itself will not tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and therefore penalty under S.271(1)(c) of the Act, cannot be imposed on the same.

DCIT v. G.E. Capital Business Process Management Services Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 51 CCH 158(2018) 63 ITR 337 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 198 : Deduction at source-Tax deducted is income received–Mismatch of receipts- Balance sheet item-Service tax wrongly treated as TDS by AO cannot be considered as income. [Form 26AS]

DCIT v. Joint Secretary Organizing Committee for Winter Games, 2009 (2018) 196 TTJ 975 / 54 CCH 84 /68 ITR 14 ( SN)/ (2019) 173 DTR 122 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 195 : Deduction at source-Non-resident-Other sums-Payment made to foreign entities for supply of equipment-where no income accrued in India – Not liable to deduct tax at source. [S.5, 9(1)(i), 194C]