Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


CIT .v. Sengunthar Matriculation Higher Secondary School (2020) 121 taxmann.com 338 / (2021) 277 Taxman 252 (Mad) (HC)

S. 10 (23C): Educational institution – Exemption cannot be denied on ground that it does not have independent Memorandum of Association , bye-laws, etc unless it is proved that assessee does not meet parameters of section 10(23C) of the Act . [ S.10(23C)(vi) ]

Bihar Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board v. CIT (2021) 318 CTR 229 / 125 taxmann.com 228 (Pat) (HC)

S. 10 (23C): Educational institution- Approval not to be denied in the absence of information regarding charging of profits

V. Gopalan v. CCIT (2021) 197 DTR 438 / 318 CTR 712 (Ker) (HC)

S. 10(10C): Public sector companies – Voluntary retirement scheme – Deduction under section 10(10C) and relief under section 89 – Simultaneously available. [ S.89(1), 264 ]

CIT (IT ) v. Micro Focus Ltd. (2021) 431 ITR 136 /197 DTR 299/ 318 CTR 670 (Delhi) (HC)/Editorial: SLP is granted to the revenue CIT v. Micro Focus Ltd (2022) 284 Taxman 444( SC)

S. 9(1)vi): Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Royalty -– Non-resident -Receiving consideration – Sale of software product – Not royalty – Not liable to tax – DTAA – India-UK [ Art .3(2), 13(3) ]

Mavilayi Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 431 ITR 1/ 318 CTR 609 / 197 DTR 361 / 279 Taxman 75(SC)

Interpretation of taxing statutes – Proviso – Ratio decidendi

Mavilayi Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 431 ITR 1/ 318 CTR 609 / 197 DTR 361 (SC) Editorial : Decision in PCIT v. Poonjar Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd [2019] 414 ITR 67 (Ker) (HC) reversed.• SLP is granted to the assessee Mavilayi Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. CIT (2019) 418 ITR 12 (St) (SC)/ (2020) 269 Taxman 387 (SC) • SLP is granted to the assessee Mavilayi Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd v. CIT (2019) 418 ITR 12 (St) (SC)/ (2020) 269 Taxman 387 (SC)

S. 80P : Co-operative societies – Section must be read liberally and reasonably and in case of ambiguity, in favour of the assessee – Once a co-operative society provides credit facilities to its members, the fact that it also provides credit facilities to non-members does not disentitle it from availing of the deduction. Section does not require that the society has to give agricultural credit only –-Proviso which excludes co-operative banks which are co-operative societies engaged in banking business and not primary agricultural credit societies- Interpretation – Proviso cannot be used to cut down language of main enactment- Precedent — Ratio decidendi alone binding and not what may seem logically to follow from it. [ S. 2(19), 80P(2)(a), 80P(4), Kerala Co-Operative Societies Act, 1969, Ss. 2(F), (Oaa), (Ob), (Oc), 3, 4, 7, 8 , Kerala Co-Operative Societies Rules, 1969, R. 15. ]

Karnataka Chamber of Commerce and Industry v. CIT (2021 ) 431 ITR 50/ 319 CTR 651 /199 DTR 305 / 278 Taxman 363(SC)

Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020

S. 4: Filing of declaration and particulars to be furnished – Appeal with drawn as dismissed – Charitable Trust – Collection of capitalisation fee for admission of students [ S. 2 (15) 11, 12 , 13, 261 ]

DCIT v. Ozone India Ltd. (2021) 189 ITD 476/ 211 TTJ 477/ 203 DTR 161/(2022) 94 ITR 609 (Ahd) (Trib)(Ahd )(Trib ) www.itatonline .org

S.56 : Income from other sources – Excess over Fair market Value of Shares – Deemed income – Not applicable – shares issued under a scheme of Amalgamation.[ S.56 (2)(viib) ]

Kumudini v. Gavit (Smt.) v. ITO (2020) 80 ITR 30 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Claim supported by various decisions and documentary evidence-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid.

Jayant B. Patel HUF v. Dy. CIT (2020) 80 ITR 44 (SN) (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Search cases-Income declared in return filed-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid-Not mentioning the specific offence committed-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid. [S. 132(4), 153A]