Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


CIT v. Shriram Chits Tamil Nadu (P.) Ltd; (2025) 473 ITR 278/ 303 Taxman 24 (Mad.) (HC)

S. 36(1)(vii): Bad debt-Payments made by a chit fund company to cover defaults by chit holders, ensuring the continuation of the chit cycle, can be treated as bad debts. [S. 37(1), 260A]

BPS Infrastructure v. ITO (2025) 473 ITR 357 (Chhattisgarh) (HC)

S. 36(1)(va) : Any sum received from employees-Employees’ contributions to PF and ESIC, made after the due date, was not allowable under section 36(1) (va) of the Income Tax Act-Delay of 690 days-No reasonable cause-Delay is not condoned. [S. 253, 260A]

CIT (IT) v. Fox Network Group Singapore Pte Ltd. (2024) 473 ITR 528 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Live sports telecast fees not royalty-No copyright in live feed-DTAA overrides domestic law-Income from live telecast is not assessable as royalty-DTAA-India-Singapore-Thailand. [Copyright Act, 1957, 2(y), 13, Art. 3]

Hyatt International Southwest Asia Ltd. v. Addl. DIT(2024) 166 taxmann.com 466 / (2025) 472 ITR 53 [FB] (Delhi) (HC)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Scope of total income-Taxation of income from permanent establishment-Effect of article 7 of India-United Arab Emirates Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement-Global income or profit irrelevant and not determinative-Article 7 does not expand its gaze or reach to overall operations or profitability of transnational enterprise-Activities of permanent establishment liable to be independently evaluated and ascertained-Article 7 does not restrict right of source State to allocate or attribute income to permanent establishment based on global income earned or loss incurred by cross border entity-DTAA-India-United Arab Emirates. [S. 5, Art. 5, 7]

PCIT v. Gravita Metal Inc. [2025] 302 Taxman 91 (J & K & L)(HC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Capital or revenue-Income-Exemption from excise duty not under the purview of definition of income envisaged under S. 2(24)(xviii)-Such amount is thus not an income but capital receipt, not taxable under the Act-Entries in books of accounts not conclusive to determine income-No tax can be charged on an amount not actually earned.[S. 2(24)(xviii),5, 10, 145]

PCIT v. Jupiter Capital Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 472 ITR 561 (Karn.) (HC) Editorial : PCIT v. Jupiter Capital Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 472 ITR 616 /303 Taxman 95 (SC)

S. 2(47): Transfer-Capital loss-Reduction of share capital-loss due to reduction in number of shares pursuant to the court order-Change in redeemable value of shares amounts to extinguishment of rights in shares-No transfer within meaning of Section 2(47) of the Act. [S 45, 260A 1]

Vinubhai Mohanlal Dobaria v. CCIT (2025) 303 Taxman 415 /473 ITR 394 (SC) Editorial : Vinubhai Mohanlal Dobaria v. Chief CIT [2017] 247 Taxman 253/ (2025) 473 ITR 387 (Guj) (HC) (para 82) reversed. Prakash Nath Khanna v. CIT [2004] 135 Taxman 327/266 ITR 1 (SC) (para 44) followed.

S. 276CC: Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-First offence under compounding guidelines-Supreme Court allows compounding-Letter F. No. 285/35/2013 IT (INV.V)/108, dated 23-12-2014. [S. 119, 139(1),139(4), 139(8), 148, 153A, Guidelines for Compounding Offences, 2014,(2015) 371 ITR 7 (St), 279(2), Art. 136]

ITO (TDS) v. Aditya Institute of Technology and Management (2025) 472 ITR 638/170 taxmann.com 708 (SC) Editorial : Aditya Institute of Technology and Management v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2024) 471 ITR 262/ 163 taxmann.com 738 (AP) (HC). (para 4)

S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-Failure to remit tax deducted at source in time to Central Government-Assessee furnishing supporting documents to show that delay was due to late receipt of fee reimbursement from state Government-Explanation for delay plausible and sufficient cause established-tax deducted at source deposited with interest for delay payment-Criminal proceedings quashed-Supreme Court-Special Leave Petition dismissed. [S. 278AA, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S. 482, Art. 136]

K. Krishnamurthy v. DCIT (2025)303 Taxman 499/ 473 ITR 557 (SC) Editorial : K. Krishnamurthy v. Dy. CIT(2025) 473 ITR 553 (Karn)(HC) [IT Appeal No. 125 of 2017, dated 2-8-2022] (para 43) reversed.

S. 271AAA: Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007-Undisclosed income-Tax and interest paid-All conditions satisfied-Not mandatory-Discretion means sound discretion guided by law-Conditions under section 271AAA (2) satisfied-No penalty is attracted. [S. 132, 143(3), 271AA(1) 271AA(2), Art. 136]

M.R. Apparels (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 472 ITR 799 (SC) Editorial M.R. Apparels (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2024) 168 taxmann.com 197 / (2025) 472 ITR 793 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-The part consideration on account of immovable property sold was not received as cheques dishonoured-The assessee did not offer Capital Gain to tax during the relevant assessment year-Pr. CIT found that the AO did not examine details regarding dishonour of cheques-Assessment Order to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue-Order of Tribunal is affirmed by High Court-SLP is dismissed-S. 263, Explanation 2(a). [S. 45, Art. 136]