Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Devika Gunasheela (Dr.) v. JCIT (2020)82 ITR 23 (SN) 185 ITD 408 / (2021 )) 209 TTJ 931/ 199 DTR 157 (Bang) (Trib)

S.54F : Capital gains- Investment in a residential house -Vacant land – Not residential property – Entitle to exemption- Cost of acquisition — Fair market value ass on 1-4-1981 —Higher than guidelines value – Estimate is held to be reasonable . [S.45, 55(2)(b) (1) ]

Anil Dev v. Dy. CIT (2020) 82 ITR 1 (SN/ 185 ITD 418 / 119 taxmann.com 328 / (2021) 198 DTR 150/ 209 TTJ 920 (Bang) (Trib)

S.54F : Capital gains- Investment in a residential house – Joint account – Denial of exemption is held to be not justified [ S.45 ]

Ramesh V. Shetty v .ACIT (2020) 82 ITR 36 (SN)(Bang) (Trib)

S. 54EC : Capital gains – Investment in bonds -Time limit for investment is six months from date of transfer- two financial years -Entitle to exemption – Amendment by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014 applies prospectively. [ S. 45 ]

Satish Kumar Agarwal v. PCIT (2020) 82 ITR 40 (SN)(Jaipur ) (Trib)

S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation -Agricultural land – Not a capita asset- A sale consideration more than the district committee rate – Addition cannot be made – Revision is held to be bad in law . [ S. 2(14), 45, 263 ]

B. S. Leelavathi (Smt.) v. ITO (2020) 82 ITR 45 (SN)(Bang) (Trib)

S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation -Property purchased from the funds of the firm – Procuring agent and not owner – Addition cannot be made – Matter remanded for verification [ S.45 ]

Suresh Bansal v. Dy. CIT (2020)82 ITR 43 (SN)(Delhi) (Trib)

S.45: Capital gains — Long-term capital gains —Sale of property taking place 11-4-2011 — Capital gains assessable in the year 2012-13 and not in the year 2008-09 . [ S. 2 (47 ) ]

Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2020) 82 ITR 16 ((SN)(Delhi) Trib)

S. 40(a)(ia): Amount not deductible -Deduction at source – Fees for professional or technical services – Discount offered to distributors – Non -Resident – Not liable to deduct tax at source- Allowable as expenditure [ S. 9(1) (vi), 37(1) , 194J , 195 ]S. 40(a)(ia): Amount not deductible -Deduction at source – Fees for professional or technical services – Discount offered to distributors – Non -Resident – Not liable to deduct tax at source- Allowable as expenditure [ S. 9(1) (vi), 37(1) , 194J , 195 ]

Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2020) 82 ITR 16 ((SN)(Delhi) Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Mobile handsets to employees , dealers and sales personal etc ,at free of cost – Allowable as business expenditure .

Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2020) 82 ITR 16 ((SN)(Delhi) Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Distributor – Trade price protection- Commercial expediency – Allowable as deduction .

Balji Electrical Insulators P. Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2020)82 ITR 39 (SN) (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 37(i) : Business expenditure —Provident fund- Contribution made after expiry of due date provided under Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 — Not allowable as deduction