Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Jalil Abdulbhai Shaikh. v. DCIT (2018) 407 ITR 418/ 254 Taxman 26 (Guj) (HC)Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed Dy.CIT v.Jalil Abdulbhai Shaikh( 2019) 261 Taxman 2 (SC)

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Survey – Return filed in response to notice u/s 148 was accepted by t6he Assessing Officer after disallowance of certain expenses- No new material or information- Reopening is bad in law. [ S.133A, 148 ]

Finest Promoters Pvt. Ltd v. UOI(2018) 407 ITR 308 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 80IA :Industrial undertakings –No requirement that Industrial Park should be operational before stipulated time — Refusal of approval because it was not operational is held to be not valid- The order and notification, withdrawing the earlier notification of 2007 was quashed.

CIT v. Prakash Electric Company. (2018) 407 ITR 340/ 305 CTR 954 (Karn) (HC)

S. 47(xiii) : Capital gains – Transaction not regarded as transfer – Conversion of firm in to company – Allotment of shares to erstwhile partners of the firm after three and half years- Exemption is not entitled . [ S.45, 47A]

PCIT v. Bhim Sain Garg Through Legal Heir Shailendra Garg. (2018) 407 ITR 388 (Raj) (HC) PCIT v. Shailendra Garg (2018) 407 ITR 388 (Raj) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed , PCIT v. Bhim Sain Garg Through Legal Heir Shailendra Garg. ( 2018) 406 ITR 9 (St).

S.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source –Commission – Principal to principal – Discount to advertisement agency – Not liable to deduct tax at source –No disallowance can be made . [ S.194H ]

PCIT v. Holy Faith International P. Ltd ( 2018) 407 ITR 445 ( P& H) (HC)

S.36(1)(iii): Interest on borrowed capital- Advances were made out of interest free funds available with assessee -Allowable as deduction .

CIT v. Jammu Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. (2018) 407 ITR 362 (J&K) (HC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income – Rule 8D is prospective in operation and is not applicable in assessment years 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07.[ R.8D ]

US Technology Resources (Pvt.) Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 407 ITR 327/ 171 DTR 225 (Ker) (HC)

S. 9(1)(vii):Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Fees for technical services – Transfer of technical knowledge, experience, skill, Know-how or process or consists of development and transfer of technical plan or design — Payment to us company for providing management, financial, legal, public relations, treasury and risk management services is not for included services —Payment is not taxable in India – When DTAA is more beneficial than income tax-Act DTAA is applicable-DTAA- India – USA- [S.90, art .12]

PCIT v. Bunge India Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 407 ITR 225 (Bom) (HC)

S.271(1)(c ): Penalty –Concealment – Inadvertently claimed higher rate of 40% depreciation instead of 25%- Bona fide mistake –Deletion of penalty is held to be justified .[ S.32 ]

PCIT v. Anjali Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 407 ITR 258 (Cal) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –Direction of Commissioner to make certain additions- Tribunal reversed the finding of Commissioner-Question of fact. [ S.260A ]

B. Jayalakshmi (Smt) v. ACIT (2018) 407 ITR 212 /258 Taxman 318/( 2019) 308 CTR 51/ 174 DTR 310(Mad) (HC)

S. 260A : Appeal – High Court -High Court has power to review- High Court recalled the order and remanded the matter to Tribunal.[S.253]