Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


ACIT v. El Dorado Biotech Pvt. Ltd (2020) 208 TTJ 817/ (2021) 186 ITD 661 (Ahd )(Trib)

S. 68: Unexplained cash credit-Not providing an opportunity to cross examine the witness-violation of principles of natural justice-when all the requisite documents and information is provided by the assesse onus shifts to the Revenue to cross verify the details furnish-otherwise no addition can be made [ S. 132, 147 , 148 ]

Rich Paints Ltd. v. ITO(2021) 186 ITD 425 / 210 TTJ 532/ 199 DTR 1 (Ahd)(Trib.)

S.68 : Cash credit -Share capital- Manipulated accounts by way of bogus/fictitious entries, transactions did not involve actual cash inflow, it was unrealizable for assessee to discharge onus of establishing identity and creditworthiness of parties and genuineness of transaction, addition cannot be made as cash credits – maxim is “Lex non cogitadimpossibilia” – theory of impossibility of performance applied – Addition was deleted .

Savita Bhasin (Smt.) v. ITO (2020) 84 ITR 602/ (2021) 186 ITD 195 (Delhi)( Trib.)

S. 54F : Capital gains – Investment in a residential house – Joint Ownership cannot come in way of claiming exemption [ S.45 ]

Noida Cyber park (P.) Ltd v. ITO (2021) 186 ITD 593 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation – Addition cannot be made under section 50C on the transfer of leasehold rights in land or building.[ S.45 ]

Maria Fernandes Cherly v. ITO (IT )(2021) 187 ITD 738/ 123 Taxmann.com 252 /209 TTJ 850 /198 DTR 137/ 85 ITR 674 (Mum)(Trib) www.itatonline.org

S. 50C: Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation – Sale Consideration – Third proviso- Retrospective- Difference between the stated consideration vis -a -vis stamp duty valuation is less than 10 % of the stated consideration , section 50C is not applicable . [ S.45 ]

Santosh Kumar Subbaniv. ITO (2020) 122 taxmann.com 169 / (2021)186 ITD 217 (Hyd)( Trib.)

S. 45: Capital gains – Transfer – Development agreement -No real development took place till date – Matter restored to AO to decide the capital gains after verifying whether the possession is taken back by the assessee or not and the assessee cancelled the development agreement or not.[ S.2(47) (v)]

Vijayeta Buildcon Pvt. Ltd v. ACIT (2021) 186 ITD 493 / 123 taxmann.com 133 (Jaipur) ( Trib.)

S. 40A(3) :Expenses or payments not deductible – Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits – purchase of lands from farmers – Disallowance deleted. [ R.6DD]

Tata Consultancy Services Ltd v. ACIT (2020) 121 taxmann.com 190 (2021) 186 ITD 721 (Mum)( Trib.)

S. 40(a)(ii) : Amounts not deductible – Rates or tax – Business expenditure – deduction for foreign taxes paid allowed while computing its income, to the extent that such tax was not entitled to the benefit of section 91 of the Act.[ S.37 (1), 91 ]

Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd. v. ACIT (2020) 118 taxmann.com 301 / (2021)186 ITD 353 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – expenditure on implementation of a new software package – Allowable as revenue expenditure.

Demag Delaval Industries Turbomachinery (P.) Ltd v. ACIT(2021) 186 ITD 228 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-expenditure incurred on affixing adhesive stamps on conveyance deed-held, it is revenue expenditure-provision for warranty-provision for present obligation due to past event-not a contingent liability-expenditure allowed-Depreciation on goodwill and customer contracts-held in nature of intangible assets, therefore eligible for depreciation [ S. 32. ]