Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


CIT (A) v. Bijapur District Central co -Operative Bank Ltd (2018) 256 Taxman 51 (Karn)(HC)Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed ; CIT v. Bijapur District Central Co-Opertaibe Bank Ltd ( 2019) 260 Taxman 297 (SC)

S. 194A : Deduction at source – Interest other than interest on securities –Co –operative society- Banking business-Interest paid to members on time deposits is not required to deduct tax at source .

Oriflame India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 256 Taxman 37/( 2019) 173 DTR 285 / 306 CTR 319(Delhi)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing -Comparable- when the Tribunal accepted the plea that functionally dissimilarity, remanding the matter to TPO was held to be not justified – Tribunal is directed to hear the appeal on merit [ S.254(1) ]

CIT v. Petro Araldite (P.) Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 16 (Bom)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing -Arm’s length price- When there is a difference in level of capacity utilization of assessee and level of capacity utilization of comparable, then adjustment would be required to be made to profit margin of comparable on account of difference in capacity utilization in terms of rule 10-B (1)(e)(iii)

PCIT v. Akzo Noble India Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 1 / ( 2019) 413 ITR 79(Cal)(HC)

S.37(1):Business expenditure – Capital or revenue – Expenses on restructuring of business is held to be allowable as revenue expenditure.Sale of one of unit- Expendiure is allowable .

Oriental Bank of Commerce v. ACIT (2018) 256 Taxman 24/ 168 DTR 345 / 304 CTR 981 (Delhi)(HC)

S.37(1):Business expenditure-Capital or revenue – Software -Expenditure incurred on acquiring licences to use software which did not confer any enduring benefit hence allowable as revenue expenditure.

CIT v. Aruna Sunrise Hotels Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 43 (Mad)( HC)

S.37(1): Business expenditure -Amount paid to cane growers in excess of price determined in Sugarcane Control order, to be allowed as deduction.

CIT v. Cactus Imaging India (P.) Ltd. (2018)406 ITR 406/ 256 Taxman 32 (Mad)( HC)

S.32:Depreciation-Printer being a part of computer, is eligible for depreciation at higher rate of 60 per cent.

CIT (A) v. Bijapur District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd (2018) 256 Taxman 51 (Karn)( HC)Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed ; CIT v. Bijapur District Central Co-Opertaibe Bank Ltd ( 2019) 260 Taxman 297 (SC)

S. 5 : Scope of total income – Co –operative society- Banking business- Accrual- Interest on doubtful debts or Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) without such interest being actually received or credited in profit & loss account of assessee- Not required to pay tax on interest income .[ S.43D ]

DCIT v. Subhas Chandra Agarwala and Sons (HUF) (2018) 65 ITR 18 (SN)(Kol) (Trib)

S. 271AAB:Penalty -Search initiated on or after Ist day of July 2012- Amount offered was not undisclosed income -Levy of penalty was held to be not justified .[ S.132 ]

Paramjit Singh v. ITO (2018) 65 ITR 244 (Amritsar) (Trib)

S.271(1) (c ):Penalty — Concealment- Quantum appeal the relief was allowed -Levy of penalty was held to be not valid .