Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Girdhari Lal v. ITO (2018) 171 ITD 176 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation-Agricultural land– Land situated within 8 km. of local Municipal limits-Addition under head capital gain applying the provision of S.50C is justified . [ S. 2(14)(iii), 45 ]

Oricon Enterprises Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 170 ITD 231 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 50B : Capital gains – Slump sale-Transfer of business division to subsidiary against shares, same was not a ‘slump sale’ but an ‘exchange’; thus, provisions of S. 50B is not applicable .[ S. 2(42C), 45 50C ]

ACIT v. Seth Industries (P.) Ltd. (2018) 171 ITD 326 (Mum)(Trib.)

S.50 : Capital gains – Depreciable assets – Block of assets – Land on which staff quarters were situated – Staff quarters depreciation was claimed – No depreciation was claimed on land- Profit on sale of land is assessable as long term capital gains .[ S.2(11),45 ]

Mateen Pyarali Dholkia v. DCIT (2018) 171 ITD 294 (Mum) (Trib.)

S.48 : Capital gains – Computation- Portfolio Management Scheme (PMS) – Deduction of PMS fee is not allowable as it is not a transfer fee, nor cost of acquisition/improvement.[ S.45 ]

Bhoote Meenakshi (Smt.) v. ACIT (2018) 62 ITR 754 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 48 : Capital gains –Property inherited on death of husband – cost of acquisition to be applied from the year when the previous owner first held asset and not when the assessee inherited the property. [S.55A]

DLF Commercial Developers Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2018) 192 TTJ 769 (Delhi.)(Trib.)

S. 48 : Capital gains – Computation -Shares held as investment -brokerage is held to be allowable as deduction – Demat charges is held to be not allowable as deduction while computing capital gains .[ S.45 ]

ACIT v. Bulls and Bears Portfolios Ltd. (2018) 62 ITR 685 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 45 : Capital gains- Business income -Investment in shares – Just because assessee has purchased and sold number of shares does not by itself make it business income when the AO accepted the scripts as investment in the balance sheet and books of account are accepted. [ S.28(i) ]

DLF Limited v. Addl. CIT (2018) 63 ITR 22 (Delhi) ( Trib)

S. 45: Capital gains- For the purpose of computation of capital gains, AO could not substitute full value of sales consideration with any notional or hypothetical value.[ S.48]

Shalom Charitable Ministries of India v. ACIT (2018) 171 ITD 338/ 195 TTJ 340 /( 2019) 177 DTR 22(Cochin) (Trib.)

S. 40A(3) :Expenses or payments not deductible – Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits -Purchase of land -Capital expenditure is charged to profit and loss account -Disallowance cannot be made .

DLF Limited v. Addl. CIT (2018) 63 ITR 22 (Delhi) ( Trib)

S. 40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Certain income and expenditure are merely pass through entries and there is no case of any adverse revenue implication, no disallowance can be made.