Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Bank of Ceylon. v. DCIT (2018) 65 ITR 83 (SN) (Chennnai ) (Trib)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment – Inaccurate particulars – Show cause should mention specific charge – Word used in notice “or” and not “and” — Levy of penalty is held to be not valid [S.274 ]

ACIT v.Surumy Mammotty (Smt.) (2018) 65 ITR 85 (Chennai) (Trib)

S. 153C : Assessment – Income of any other person – Search -No incriminating material was found during course of search — Assessment is not valid.[ S.153A ]

DCIT v. Mittal Corporation Ltd. (2018) 65 ITR 65 (SN) (Indore) (Trib)

S. 145A : Method of accounting – Valuation – Excise duty and taxes – Recorded purchases net of taxes —Not required to add excise duty and other taxes while valuing closing stock .[ Accounting Standard,2. ]

M. P. Mehrotra (HUF) v. DCIT (2018) 65 ITR 71 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib)

S.45: Capital gains — Business income —Shares and securities – Conversion of stock-in-trade into investment – Held to be valid -Gains assessable as capital gains. [ S.28(i) ]

ITO v. Divyam TIE-UP Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 65 ITR 75( SN) (Kol.) (Trib)

S.45: Capital gains — Business income — Sale of shares- Principle of consistency- Preceding and subsequent years department , accepting income on account of sale of investments as short term capital gains- Sale consideration is assessable as capital gains .[ S.28(i) ]

DPJ Viniyog P. Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 65 ITR 74 (SN)(Kol.) (Trib)

S.45: Capital gains — Business income – Investment in shares -Consistently valuing investment at cost -Profits on sale of sale of investment is assessable as capital gains .[ S.28(i) ]

India Agro Exports P. Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 65 ITR 81 ( SN) (Chennai) (Trib)

S. 10B: Export oriented undertakings – Manufacture -Processed Foods, Pickles, Fresh Fruits and vegetables — Neither the AO nor the Assessee brought on record the process of manufacturing activities – Matter remanded to the AO to find out whether there was manufacture per se, or not, what was the break-up of the exports of the processed foods, pickles, fresh vegetables and fruits separately, and after determining all the facts, the Assessing Officer shall re -adjudicate the issue after granting the assessee adequate opportunity to substantiate its case.

Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 173 ITD 130 / 196 TTJ 318/ 66 ITR 33 (SN)(Ahd.) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – In the course of scrutiny assessment, AO disallowed a part of business advancement expenses after verifying bills and vouchers- Manufacturing – R& D expenditure – Revision for further disallowance, re-determined claim of deduction under S. 80-IC and 80-IE and Weighted deduction-R& D expenditure – Revision is held to be not justified when in the Course of original assessment the AO has examined all the claims. [S. 35, 80IC, 80IE]

Nitesh Agarwal v. ACIT (2018) 173 ITD 14 / 196 TTJ 27 (UO)(Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Condonation of delay of 387 days-turbulent time in family as well as with his earlier Chartered Accountant -Copy of complaint against the Chartered Accountant was also filed before the various authorities including the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Jaipur. – Delay was condoned .[S. 254(1)]

Sonu Khandelwal (Smt.) v. ITO (2018) 173 ITD 67 /195 TTJ 715 /172 DTR 42/ 66 ITR 81 (SN)(Jaipur) (Trib.)

S. 151 : Reassessment-Sanction for issue of notice -After the expiry of four years- Without obtaining sanction-Entire reassessment proceedings stood vitiated-Even if assessment was reopened in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or direction of Appellate Authority, requirement of sanction is mandatory for issuing notice. [S. 147, 148, 149, 150]