Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


PCIT v. Bothra Shipping Services (P) Ltd (2024) 166 taxmann.com 608/341 CTR 585 /243 DTR 432 / 8 NYPCTR 1280 (Cal)(HC)

S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development-Tribunal is right in coming to the conclusion that the permission obtained from the customs authority by the assessee vide a letter dt. 1st Feb., 2013 is deemed to be the approval granted by the competent authority of the Central Government-Entitled to deduction under S. 80IA(4)(i).[S.80IA(4)(i), 260A]

Sandeep Hooda v. PCIT (2024) 169 taxmann.com 20 / 341 CTR 933 / 244 DTR 273 / 8 NYPCTR 1533 (2005)302 Taxman 208 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-Capital gains-Temporary structure-Putting together a structure of plywood sheets cannot be construed as constructing a residential house-Inspector had also reported that there was no electricity or water connection on the land and electricity was used by genset-Order of Tribunal rejecting the exemption is affirmed. [S. 45, 260A]

Rajiv Mehra v. CIT (2024) 168 taxmann.com 273 /341 CTR 329 / 243 DTR 161 / 8 NYPCTR 1424 (P&H) (HC)

S. 49 : Capital gains-Previous owner-Cost of acquisition-Family settlement-Father acquired a property prior to 1-4-1981 and after his death said property was given to assessee by way of family settlement in 2003-Sale of property in 2007-Computing capital gain, indexed cost of acquisition was to be worked out with reference to 1-4-1981 and not with reference to date on which assessee acquired property by family arrangement, i.e., in 2003.[S. 45, 48]

PCIT v. Ideal Data Electronic Application Ltd.(2024) 341 CTR 1048 / 168 taxmann.com 189 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax-Remission or cessation of trading liability-Advance from a party against project to be carried out Project could not be implemented and amount is not returned due to financial constraints-Never received any benefit or enjoyed money that it had received as an advance, provisions of section 41(1) would not be applicable.[S.28(iv)]

CIT v. Ravi Kumar Sinha (2024)165 Taxmann.com 472 / 341 CTR 185 / 243 DTR 145 / 8 NYPCTR 1004 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 17(2) : Salary-Perquisite-Employees stock purchase scheme-Lock in period-Shares which are subject to a lock-in stipulation and could not be sold in the open market owing to a complete embargo on the sale of those shares-The FMV could not have been recognized to exceed the face value of the shares. [S. 2(22B), 15, 17(2)(iiia), 260A]

Williamson Financial Services Ltd. v. CIT (2024) 341 CTR 359 / 242 DTR 537 / 301 Taxman 102/ 8 NYPCTR 1253 (Gauhati)(HC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Binding precedent-Tribunal is not justified in holding that the judgment of Delhi High Court is not binding upon it-Said conduct of the members of the Tribunal is liable to be condemned-Explanation inserted to section 14A vide Finance Act, 2022 is prospective in nature. [S. 254(1), R.8D]

PCIT v. Alchemist Ltd. (2024) 167 taxmann.com 284 /341 CTR 668 / 242 DTR 489 / 8 NYPCTR 1099 (Delhi)(HC) PCIT v. Uno Minda Ltd (2024) 167 taxmann.com 284 / 341 CTR 668 / 242 DTR 489 / 8 NYPCTR 1099 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Interest-No exempt income-Income of an assessee has both taxable and non-taxable elements, it would be principle of apportionment of expenditure relating to non-taxable income which would have to be identified for purpose of making disallowance under section 14A-No disallowance can me made-Explanation in S. 14A came to be inserted by virtue of the 2022 Act, w.e.f. 1st April, 2022 will apply in relation to the asst. years. 2022-23 and subsequent assessment years. [S. 260A, R.8D]

Royal Bank of Scotland N. V. v. CIT (2024) 341 CTR 981 / 162 taxmann.com 780 (Cal.)(HC)

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-No conflict between provision of DTAA between India and Netherlands-Non-discrimination and there was no ambiguity in classification and rates of tax, assessee, which is not a ‘domestic company’, is liable to tax at rates prescribed for a company ‘other than a domestic company’-DTAA-India-Netherlands. [S. 2(17), 2(23A), 90, Art. 24(2)]

Tasavver Husain v. ITO (2024)113 ITR 236 (Agra)(Trib)

S. 271B :Penalty-Failure to get accounts audited-Running a milk booth for distribution of products of Mother Dairy and Vegetables Pvt Ltd-Commission income-Bona fide belief-Penalty is not leviable. [S.44AB, 273B]

Ajay Kumar Sood Engineers and Contractors v.Dy. CIT (2024)113 ITR 34 (SN)(Chd)(Trib)

S. 271AAA : Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007-Undisclosed Income-Surrender of income-Specific charge-Burden of proof to establish there was undisclosed income is on Assessing Officer-Penalty is deleted.[S. 132, 132(4)]