Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Academy Of Medical Sciences v. CIT (2018) 403 ITR 74 / 254 Taxman 419/ 170 DTR 388/ 305 CTR 659 (Ker) (HC)

S.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source- Recipient has filed belated return hence conditions not satisfied – Liable to deduct tax at source-Liable to pay tax with interest [ S.201(1)]

DIT v. Delhi Public School Society. (2018) 403 ITR 49 / 165 DTR 257/ 255 Taxman 78/ 305 CTR 500 (Delhi) (HC).Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed , DIT ( E ) v. Delhi Public Schools Society (2018) 259 Taxman 404/( 2019) 260 Taxman 88 ( SC)

S. 10 (23C): Educational institution- Merely because surplus profit earned in educational activities did not automatically presuppose a business activity that invalidated the exemption as long as surplus was utilised for charitable purposes . [ S.2(15), 10(23C)(via),11(4A) ]

CIT v. Prasidh Leasing Ltd. (2018) 403 ITR 129 / 301 CTR 526 /163 DTR 475 /254 Taxman 142 (Delhi) (HC)

S.2(22)(e ): Deemed dividend- Loan to shareholder — Finding that loan was not trading transaction therefore assessable as deemed dividend .

CIT v Same Deutz-Fahr India (P) Ltd. (2018) 405 ITR 345/163 DTR 456 /301 CTR 591/ 253 Taxman 32 (Mad) (HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing – Arm’s length price –It would be impossible to find comparable with all similarities including the similarity of turnover- A functionally similar company cannot be excluded as comparable only on ground that company had a higher turnover .

CIT v. Makwana Brothers & Co. (HWP) (2018) 161 DTR 289 (Bom) (HC)

S. 80IB(10) : Housing projects- Project containing commercial units to the extent permitted by rules and regulation is allowable as deduction. Tribunal is justified in allowing partial deduction only in respect of building completed.

CIT v Shipra Estate Ltd. (2018) 162 DTR 332 /301 CTR 34 (All) (HC)

S. 80IB(10) : Housing projects -Commencement of construction before 1-10-1998- If either the development or the construction starts before the specified date, the benefit of deduction is not allowable . [ S.80IA(5)]

CIT v Russian Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 300 CTR 501 (Delhi)(HC) PCIT v. Claridges Hotels ( P) Ltd ( 2018) 300 CTR 501 ( Delhi) (HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits -Share application – The assessees has filed balance sheet confirmation etc, addition cannot be made merely on suspicion , if AO has any doubt he should make enquiry with lenders bank etc .

CIT v Narinderjit Singh (2018) 161 DTR 200 / 300 CTR 217 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 37 (1) : Business expenditure – Provision for deficiency in service – Ascertained liability – Profits chargeable to tax – Remission or cessation -Addition cannot be made. [ S.145 ]

CIT v Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. (2018) 405 ITR 595/ 162 DTR 281/ 301 CTR 552/ 253 Taxman 292 (Ker) ( HC)

S. 2(22)(e):Deemed dividend- Trade discount – Agents’ deposit – Regular business transactions cannot be assessed as deemed dividend .

Promain Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 170 ITD 188 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 158BC : Block assessment -Statement u/s 132(4) can be used against the assessee only if the statement has relevance to any incriminating document or material found during course of search -Block assessment is held to be bad in law.[ S. 132(4) ]