Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Sanjay Kaul v. ITO (2020) 181 ITD 146/ 82 ITR 441 /191 DTR 60/ 206 TTJ 176 (Delhi)(Trib.) Editorial : Affirmed in Sanjay Kaul v. PCIT (2020) 427 ITR 63/274 Taxman 301/119 taxmann.com 470/193 DTR 57 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Income from undisclosed sources-Short-term capital loss-Bogus transaction-Denial of opportunity of cross examination-Disallowance not solely on basis of statement of persons but on other corroborative materials-Denial of opportunity to cross-examine and mentioning wrong section would not render the assessment order null and void. [S. 68, 69C]

Rajesh Gupta v. ITO (2020) 82 ITR 517 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Same turnover cannot be taxed in hands of two different assesses-Addition unsustainable-AO is directed to adopt Profit ratio of eight Per Cent as net profit on gross receipts [S. 147, 148]

Murlidhar Deendayal v. ITO (2020) 82 ITR 223 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 133A : Power of survey-Undisclosed Sales-Quantity tally of stock maintained-Merely on the basis of confessional statement addition cannot be made.

NXP India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2020) 82 ITR 467 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparables-High degree of brand value-Cannot be comparable.

L’oreal India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 82 ITR 595 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Advertising and promotion expenses-Reimbursement of expenses-Adjustment is held to be not valid-Additional evidence-Packaging, design cost-Issue remanded-Depreciation-Good will-Actual cost-Matter remanded. [S. 32, 92CA(3), 234A, 234B, 254(1)]

ITO v. Darshan Lal (2020) 82 ITR 154 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Cash deposited of sales-Sales cannot be assesse as cash credits-Only gross profit can be estimated-Ad hoc disallowance of 1/5 of expenses is held to be not justified. [S. 37(1), 143(3)]

ACIT v. Deepak Soni (2020) 82 ITR 324 (Indore)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Identity, genuineness and creditworthiness established-Deletion of addition is held to be justified-Unintended mistakes-Remand report-Deletion of addition is held to be justified. [S. 69C]

Prem Chand Jain v. ACIT (2020) 183 ITD 372/ 82 ITR 522/ 194 DTR 37/207 TTJ 629 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 56 : Income from other sources-Capital asset-Agricultural land-If agricultural land does not fall in definition of capital asset, difference between district level committee value and sales consideration cannot be brought to tax-Matter remanded. [S. 2(14)(iii), 56(2)(vii)(b)]

Harvansh Chawla v. ACIT (2020) 82 ITR 160 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 56 : Income from other sources-Notional interest-Security deposit-Only incomes falling under deeming provisions explicitly mentioned in Act can be brought to tax-Burden on revenue-Addition was deleted. [S. 4, 22]

Abhinav International P. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2020) 82 ITR 258 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 56 : Income from other sources-Valuation of shares-Premium on shares-If assessee can substantiate higher value than the Valuation as per Rules higher value should be considered-Matter remanded. [S. 56(2)(viib), R. 11UA]