Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


Solvay Pharma India Ltd. v. PCIT (2018) 169 ITD 13/ 192 TTJ 394 /163 DTR 249 / 62 ITR 643 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure -Advertisement , Marketing and business promotion expenses (AMP) by pharmaceutical company for promoting sale and brand was held to be allowable business expenditure. Revision was held to be not valid [ S. 263 ],

Allahabad Bank v. DCIT ( 2018) 169 ITD 189 ( Kol) ( Trib)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure – Bank-Amortisation of premium paid for purchase of securities was to be allowed as deduction .

ACIT v.Narendra J.Bhimani ( 2018) 169 ITD 245 (Rajkot) (Trib.)

S. 45: Capital gains- Business income- Sale of land in small plots as required by end users is assessable as capital gains. [ S. 28(i)]

Nand Nandan Agrawal v. DCIT (2018) 169 ITD 161 (Agra) (Trib.)

S. 43(5) : Speculative transaction – Currency derivatives -Transactions through a recognised stock broker on recognised stock exchange , could not be termed as speculative transaction . [ S.73 ]

Mahesh Malneedi. v. ITO (2018) 169 ITD 154 (Hyd) (Trib.)

S. 54F : Capital gains – Investment in a residential house –Sale is not concluded or agreement of sale is not certain to be honoured, assessee cannot claim deduction in respect of purchase or construction of property [ S.45, 54F(4)]

Regency Mahavir Properties v. ACIT (2018) 169 ITD 35/64 ITR 628 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 69 :Unexplained investments – On money -No addition can be made on the basis of the documents found from premises of third party neither the name of assessee was mentioned nor any evidence was found for purchase of any property [ S. 132, 153A ]

Regency Mahavir Properties v. ACIT (2018) 169 ITD 35 / 64 ITR 628(Mum) (Trib.)

S. 153A : Assessment – Search-When there was no search proceedings against the assessee , assessment made in consequence of notice issued under section 153A, is invalid and void ab initio . [ S. 69,132 ]

Mohan Meakin Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 168 ITD 99 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 153C : Assessment – Income of any other person – Search – Illegal payments -Addition made on the basis of third party statement who have retracted and without giving an opportunity of cross examination initiation of proceedings was held to be not valid [S.132 ]

Dismissing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that , claim for deduction under S. 35(1) could not be allowed where it did not maintain separate books of account in respect of its research and development activity, however the direction given by the CIT was modified allowing the AO to examine the claim .( AY. 2009-10) Nivo Controls (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 169 ITD 139 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -Scientific research – Revision was held to be justified and the direction given by the CIT was modified allowing the AO to examine the claim [ S. 35(1)]

Allahabad Bank v. DCIT ( 2018) 169 ITD 189 ( Kol) ( Trib)

S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal- Additional ground- Failure to deduct tax at source- Issue which was not contested before the CIT(A) , it is open to the assessee to challenge the disallowance first time before the Tribunal, additional ground was admitted and matter was remanded to the file of AO for adjudication on merits. [ S. 40(a)(ia), 44AB,194A,194I, Art. 265 ]