Author: ksalegal

Author Archive


P. Amarnath Reddy. v DCIT (2018) 409 ITR 645 (Mad)(HC)

S. 145A : Method of accounting – Valuation -Stock- Trading in shares — Valuation of shares according to net realisable value is held to be justified .[S.145(2) ]

SGS India Pvt. Ltd. v. JCIT (2018) 409 ITR 550/ 304 CTR 640/ 169 DTR 219 (Bom)(HC)

S. 80-O : Royalties – Foreign enterprises -Fees for technical services rendered to foreign entity — Explanation added with effect from 1-4-1992 — Fees for services rendered in India- Not entitled to deduction – Principle of consistency or doctrine of precedents would not apply when there is change in law.

Admac Formulations. v. CIT (2018) 409 ITR 661 (P&H)(HC) Editorial: Order in Hycron Electronics v. ITO ( 2015) 41 ITR 486 (Chd) (Trib) is affirmed

S. 80IC : Special category States -Initial Assessment Year —Substantial expansion- Claimed 100% deduction for five years- Cannot claim deduction at 100 Per Cent. beyond period of five years on ground of substantial expansion.

G. H. Reddy And Associates v. ACIT (2018) 409 ITR 514 (Mad) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue s dismissed ACT v G. H. Reddy And Associates ( 2019) 418 ITR 11 (St)/ ( 2020 ) 274 Taxman 283 (SC)

S. 45(4) : Capital gains – Distribution of capital asset – Dissolution of firm -Change in constitution of firm -Retirement of some partners and induction of new partners — No revaluation of assets — Businesses continued — Firm reconstituted and not dissolved-Not liable to pay capital gains tax . [ S. 45,187(2) ]

Harrisons Malayalam Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 409 ITR 621 (Ker) (HC)

S.37 (1): Business expenditure —Travelling expenditure of wife of Company’s Senior Executive accompanying him abroad for his medical treatment — Expenditure is held to be not allowable . [ S.264 ]

CIT v. Reebok India Company. (2018) 409 ITR 587 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: Reebok India Company v. Dy CIT ( 2017) 56 ITR 211 ( Delhi) (Trib) is affirmed.

S. 36(1)(iii) :Interest on borrowed capital -Commercial expediency – Interest free advance to third parties -Interest paid is held to be allowable as deduction .

CIT v. Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purshottam Public Charitable Trust. (2018) 409 ITR 591 / ( 2019) 261 Taxman 229(Guj) (HC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Accumulation of income- Explanation of purposes for which funds accumulated was furnished during course of assessment proceedings is a sufficient compliance . [ S.11(2), form No 10 ]

CIT v. Shanti Devi Educational Trust. (2018) 409 ITR 522 /( 2019) 261 Taxman 339(P&H) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed, CIT v. Shanti Devi Educational Trust ( 2018) 405 ITR 20 (St.)

S. 10 (23C): Educational institution- Registration u/s 12AA is not mandatory to claim exemption.[ S.12AA, 10 (23C(iiiad)]

Bharathi Cement Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (Hyd) (Trib), www.itatonline.org

S. 68 : Cash credits – Share premium-The fact that the premium is abnormally high as per test of human probabilities is not sufficient-The AO has to lift the corporate veil & determine whether any benefit is passed on to the shareholders/directors. Directions issued to AO to establish whether assessee company was used as a vehicle to pass on the benefit to shareholders/directors- Tribunal directed the AO to verify all the funds and cash flow management of the company for both AY. 2009-10 & 2010-11. AO should not resort to rely on circumstantial evidence or on test of human probabilities but on factual evidence of passing of benefit to the shareholders/directors- Addition was deleted subject to verification . [S.28(iv),56 ]

PCIT v. Perfect Circle India Pvt. Ltd. (Bom)(HC), www.itatonline.org

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source -The second proviso to S. 40(a)(ia) is beneficial to the assessee and is declaratory and curative in nature. Accordingly, it must be given retrospective effect.[ S.201(1) ]