Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Hussain Indorewala v. UOI (2018) 408 ITR 338 /303 CTR 641/168 DTR 113 /257 Taxman 465 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 139AA : Return of income – Quoting of Aadhaar Number – CBDT issued a Press Release dated 27-3-2018 which extended time to link PAN with Aadhar number, while filing Income-tax return from 31-3-2018 to 30-6-2018 – Two High Courts on basis of said press release had directed for accepting ITRs without Aadhar No. and no attempt was made to vary said orders by department -Thus, department should accept returns if uploaded on or before 30-6-2018 without Aadhar Number, Aadhar Enrollment or any linkage with PAN details and in case system does not accept returns of income they are at liberty to file their return of income in physical form with jurisdictional Assessing Officer on or before 2-7-2018 [ R. 12(3) ]

Herambh Anandrao Shelke v. M.L. Karmakar, PCIT (2018) 257 Taxman 487 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 127 : Power to transfer cases – Kolhapur to Mumbai -On facts, mere ‘Absence of dissenting notice’ from officers of equal rank who had to agree to proposed transfer, would not constitute agreement-Order of transfer of case was set aside.[ S.127(2)(a) ]

CIT v. Philips Software Centre (P.) Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxman 449/( 2019) 173 DTR 291 / 306 CTR 405 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing – Arms’ length price –Mere observation of the Tribunal that the assessee being a newly established undertaking in free trade zone which is claiming deduction under S. 10A, provisions of Chapter X regarding Transfer Pricing ought not to have been applied -Court held that no reversal of finding of Assessing authority by the Tribunal hence appeal is not maintainable . [ S. 92C(4), 254(1),260A ]

CIT v. Makwana Brothers & Co (HWP) ( 2017) 88 taxmann.com 278 ( Bom) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed ; CIT v. Suyog Shivalaya (2018) 257 Taxman 334 (SC)

S. 80IB(10 :Housing projects- Local authorities could approve a housing project along with commercial user to extend permitted under DC Rules /Regulations framed by respective local authority -When local authorities approve the project as housing project – Deduction cannot be denied

DXN Herbal Manufacturing (India) (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 257 Taxman 492/ ( 2019) 411 ITR 646/ 307 CTR 556/ 174 DTR 203 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 80IB : Industrial undertakings – Manufacture – Ayurvedic medical products- Filling of mushroom powder in gelatin capsules after following specified process amounts to manufacture or production of commercially distinct commodity -Entitle to deduction .

CIT v. Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 358/ 257 Taxman 597 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 80G : Donation -Donation to a charitable trust for applying the same for air-conditioning of a town hall owned by local authority- As the charitable trust merely acted as agent of assessee in carrying out air condition of hall and there was no donation made by assessee which could be applied for charitable purposes for which the trust was established – Claim is not allowable as deduction .[ S.37(1) ]

CIT v. Shriram Chits & Investments (P.) Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxman 395/(2019) 410 ITR 10 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 72 : Carry forward and set off of business losses – Dividend – where investments were business investments, carried forward business loss could be set off against dividend income earned from such business investment as even though dividend was classified under separate head, but same was very much part of income from business.[ S.56 ]

CIT v. B.G. Shirke Construction Technology (P.) Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxman 561/ 172 DTR 28 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed PCIT v. B. G. Shirke Construction Technology (P.) Ltd ( 2019) 265 Taxman 543 (SC)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure -Search-Work in progress-Valuation report of site engineer higher than work -in- progress recorded in the books of account -Addition is held to be not valid [ S. 69A,132 ]

PCIT v. Subarna Rice Mill (2018) 257 Taxman 509 (Cal.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect ,PCIT v. Subarna Rice Mill ( 2020 ) 269 Taxman 565 (SC)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure – Survey- Undisclosed stock -When undisclosed purchases are discovered- Only profit embedded in transaction can be added as income .[ S. 4, 133A, 145 ]

CIT v. Archana Trading Co. (2018) 257 Taxman 386 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 69B : Amounts of investments not fully disclosed in books of account –Survey- Suppression of sales – Sale suppression detected during survey was actual price for which liquor was sold, addition made on account of sale suppression is held to be justified .[ S.133A ]