Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


CIT v. Tamilnadu Urban Development Fund. (2019) 263 Taxman 318/ 181 DTR 139/ 310 CTR 491 (Mad.)(HC).Editorial: SLP of revenue is dimissed , CIT v. Tamilnadu Urban Development Fund ( 2020) 269 Taxman 5 (SC)

S. 62 : Transfer irrevocable for a specified period–Revocable after three years – Income arising by virtue of a revocable transfer of assets would be chargeable to tax as income of transferors and would be included in their total income- Trust cannot be taxed as an AOP at maximum marginal rate. [S.61(1), 62(2), 164]

Radhika Roy v. DCIT ( 2019) 200 TTJ 665/ 73 ITR 239 / 180 DTR 329(Delhi)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org Dr. Prannoy Roy v. DCIT( 2019) 200 TTJ 665/ 73 ITR 239 (Delhi)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org

S. 56 : Income from other Sources-Purchase of shares at Rs. 4 per shares when the market price was Rs. 140 per share-Failure to explain by credible evidence or any reason or no motive for tax evasion- Difference is held to be taxable as income. [S.56(2)(vii) (c)]

Dattatray Poultry Breeding Farm (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 415 ITR 407/ 263 Taxman 324 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax-Remission or cessation of trading liability-Cash credits-Liabilities doubted-Cannot be taxed u/s. 41(1) [S.68]

Nandkishor Motilal Shah. v. CIT (2019) 415 ITR 429/ 263 Taxman 36/ 179 DTR 170/ (2020) 314 CTR 663 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure–Capital or revenue-Amount forfeited by seller upon failure to pay full instalments within stipulated time period would be capital expenditure.[S. 28(i)]

CIT v. TVS Electronics Ltd. (2019) 419 ITR 187/ 263 Taxman 164 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 35 : Scientific research–Weighted deduction-Research and Development-Expenditure on development of “Research and Development’ facility was allowable even though approval of concerned Ministry of Central Government was under consideration or awaited. [S. 35(2AB)]

PCIT v. Piramal Glass Ltd. (Bom.)(HC), www.itatonline.org

S. 32 : Depreciation-Intangible asset-Non-compete fee-The expression “or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature” used in Explanation 3 to sub-section 32(1)(ii) is wide enough to include non-compete rights–Eligible for depreciation. [S.32(i(ii)]

CIT v. Associated Cables (P.) Ltd. (2019) 105 taxmann.com 113/263 Taxman 251 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed; CIT v. Associated Cables (P.) Ltd. (2019) 263 Taxman 250 (SC)

S. 32 : Depreciation-Unabsorbed depreciation-Carry forward and set off-Eligible and for carry forward and set off against business profits. [S. 32(2)]

PCIT v .Jitendra J. Mehta (2019) 104 taxman.com 448 / 263 Taxman 6 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Jitendra J. Mehta. (2019) 263 Taxman 5 (SC)

S. 32 : Depreciation-Additional depreciation-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Tribunal allowed assessee’s claim for additional depreciation by following order of jurisdictional High Court – Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 263]

Time Media & Entertainment LLP v. ITO (Mum.)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org

S. 28(i) : Business loss-Future and options loss-Client code modification- Repetitive client code modifications-Client code modifications are tainted with collusive action and manipulation– Loss is held to be bogus–Not allowable as business loss- Reassessment is also upheld. [S.133(6), 147, 148]

V. Ramakrishnan v. DCIT (2019) 263 Taxman 145 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 15 : Salaries–Provision made by a company for payment of managerial remuneration- Liable to be assessed as salary.