Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Kandan & Kannan Medical Agency v. ITO (2020) 269 Taxman 291 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment-Assessing Officer has made addition on account of two grounds-Show cause notice u/s 142 (1) was in respect of only one ground-Order set aside and reamended back for redoing the assessment. [S. 69A, 142(1), Art. 226]

DDIT v. Ramesh Dang (2020) 269 Taxman 110 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 116 : Inspectors of Income-tax-Service matter-Pay scale-Technical Assistant claimed parity of allowances and salary with that of Inspector of Income Tax, such parity was to be decided by CAT on basis of recommendations of expert bodies like Pay Commission or Anomalies Committee, and not on basis of fact that in past, pay scale of two posts were at par. [S. 116(h)]

PCIT v. Equant Solutions India P. Ltd. (2020) 269 Taxman 315 (P&H)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparable-Software product development-Company have brand value and more than 24 times that of turnover-Significant intangible assets-Business restructuring-Extraordinary event of amalgamation-Company which developed its own web based software-Huge brand value-BPO services-Additional evidence-Matter remanded. [S. 254(1), 260A]

PCIT v. Realvalue Realtors (P) Ltd. (2020) 269 Taxman 64 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Share application money-Opening balance-Substantial loan was received in earlier year addition cannot be made-Sufficient evidence was produced as regards additional amount received during the year-Deletion of addition is held to be justified. [S.260A]

PCIT v. Star Entertainment Media (P) Ltd. (2020) 269 Taxman 66 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Marketing and publicity expenses-Star Pravaha-Star Maza-Allowable as business expenditure incidental benefit to some other party from such expenses, would not reduce allowability of such expenditure.

CIT v. KEC International Ltd. (2020) 269 Taxman 275 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 36(1)(iii) : Interest on borrowed capital Investment in group companies for strategic business purpose-Allowable as deduction.

CIT(E) v. India Habitat Centre (2020) 269 Taxman 401 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Primary aim and objective to promote habitat concept-Registered as Charitable Trust-Principle of mutuality not required to be gone in to-Entitle to exemption. [S. 2(15), 12, 13]

PCIT v. Prince Water House (2020) 270 Taxman 307 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Risk Policy Premium-Revision barred by limitation-Order of Tribunal is affirmed. [S. 37(1)]

Vipin Mehta v. CIT (2020) 270 Taxman 67 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Capital gains-Full value of consideration-Stamp valuation-Reference to DVO-Grounds not raised before the Tribunal-Not allowed to raise the ground in an appeal before High court. [S. 45, 50C, 254(1)]

Vattiyoorkavu Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. ITO (2020) 270 Taxman 274 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Dismissal of appeal as defective and also stay application-Matter remitted to Commissioner (Appeals) for consideration and decision afresh on merits. [S. 271B, Art. 226]