Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Lakadri Naidu v. ITO ( 2020) The Chamber’s Journal – September – P. 112 ( Hyd) (Trib)

S.68: Cash credits – Gift from father and brother – Agricultural income- Source of deposit explained – Addition is held to be not justified .

Bhimanna Shrinivasa Rao v. ITO ( 2020) The Chamber’s Journal – May – P. 90 ( Vishakha) (Trib)

S.68: Cash credits – Gift received by son- Source of cash deposits were explained – Addition cannot be made on the suspicion that source of source is doubtful.

Keharwani Sheetalaya Sahsaon v. CIT ( 2020) 116 taxmann.com 382 / 274 Taxman 25/191 DTR 339 / 315 CTR 815 ( All) (HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits – Firm -Partner- Capital brought in by partner – Agricultural income -Addition cannot be made in the assessment of the firm . [ S.2(31) (iv) ]

Ramesh Govindbhai Patel v .ITO ( 2020) 118 taxman. com 201 ( Ahd) (Trib)

S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation – Addition cannot be made without referring the matter to DVO- Power of Attorney holder does not became the owner of property on signing the sale deed in the capacity as constituted attorney [ S.45 ]

CIT v. C. Ramaiah Reddy ( 2020) 272 Taxman 342/ 117 taxmann.com 540/ 192 DTR 425/ 316 CTR 370 ( Karn) (HC)

S. 45(2) : Capital gains – Conversion of a capital asset in to stock-in-trade – Asset received under family arrangement treated as stock in trade – Addition cannot be made as capital gains. [ S.2(14), 49(1)]

ITO v. Abdul Kayam Ahmed Moham Tamboli ( 2020) The Chamber’s Journal -August P. 119 ( Mum) (Trib)

S.45: Capital gains – Development rights – Business assets -Accrual of income – Provisions of Section 2(47) r.w.s 53A of the Transfer of property Act 1882 are not applicable to transfer of development rights held by assessee as business assets [ S. 2(47)(v),44AD, 145 , Transfer of Property Act , 1882 , S.53A]

Anik Industries Ltd v. DCIT ( 2020) 116 taxmann.com 385 ( Mum) (Trib)

S.45: Capital gains- Reduction in share capital- Compensation received by an existing partner on reduction of his share in the partnership firm is not liable gains tax [ S. 2(47), 4, 45(1) , 45(4)

ITO v. Sri Vasavi Polymers Pvt Ltd ( 2020) 2020] 117 taxmann.com 236 ( Vishakha) (Trib)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax – Remission or cessation of trading liability – Waiver of loan is neither taxable u/s 41(1) nor u/s 28(v ) of the Act .[ S.28 (v) ]

Aspect Research & Management P. Ltd v. ITO ( 2020) The Chamber’s Journal – June -P 81 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Capital or revenue- Repair and renovation of leased premises – Revenue expenditure – Power of CIT (A) – Cannot travel beyond the direction of the ITAT order [ S.250, 254(1)]

Multitute Infrastructure Pvt Ltd v. Dy .CIT ( 2020) The Chamber’s Journal – March – P .123 ( Delhi) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – One time payment of annual lease rent is held to be allowable as revenue expenditure