Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Jairam G Kimmane. v.Dy.CIT (2020) 185 ITD 511 /( 2021 ) 88 ITR 3008 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 45 : Capital gains-Agricultural Land-sold was too small-No evidence was produced for the agricultural activities carried on-Assessable as capital gains. [S. 2(14)(iii)]

Landbase India Ltd. (2020) 80 ITR 580 / 185 ITD 40 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 43(3) : Plant-Golf course-Eligible depreciation at 15%. [S. 32]

Karnataka State Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 83 ITR 386 / 185 ITD 441/( 2021 ) 211 TTJ 362 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 40A(9) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Amount was paid for welfare of employees of assessee and not as contribution to any fund, trust, etc.-Provision is not applicable-Less than monetary limit-Appeal is not maintainable. [S. 268A]

Ramesh Exports (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 185 ITD 551 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 40A(3) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits-Payments were made by Cheques-Disallowance is held to be not justified.

Amit Yadav v. ITO (2020) 185 ITD 353 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Quantum of disallowance-Provision would cover payable but also those sum which are payable at any time during year.

Star India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 185 ITD 559/81 ITR 8 (SN) (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Channel placement fees-Short deduction of tax at source-No disallowance can be made. [S. 9(1)(vi), 194C, 194J]

Quippo Telecom Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 185 ITD 275 / (2021) 198 DTR 378 / 209 TTJ 828 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Passive infrastructure and automated teller machine sites to telecom and banking industry Professional Charges-Interest on borrowed capital-Not carried on any business during the relevant year-Not allowable as business expenditure. [S. 36(1)(iii)]

Katira Construction Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 185 ITD 173 (Rajkot) (Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Ad-hoc addition-Books of account not rejected-Addition is held to be not valid.

Adadyn Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 185 ITD 426 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Abandoned project-Promotion of business of company-Held to be revenue expenditure.

Ramesh Exports (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 185 ITD 551 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Commission-Details of service was not furnished-Disallowance is held to be justified.