Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Reshi Construction Company v. CIT (2024) 167 taxmann.com 47 /(2025) 472 ITR 570 (J & K& L)(HC)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Compulsory Scrutiny-Difference between the value of plant and machinery shown in the Balance Sheet on 31-03-2004 and opening balance shown on 01-04-2004 in the books of accounts-Assessee firm failed to explain the difference in the investments in plant and machinery-Addition is confirmed, [S. 119, 143(2), 144, 260A]

PCIT (Central v. M.K. Rajendran Pillai Rajavalsam [2025] 302 Taxman 512 (Ker)(HC)

S. 68: Cash credits-Credit transfer received by other family members and group concerns could not be assumed to be assessee’s undisclosed income where AO failed to establish that assessee was de facto owner of bank accounts of various recipients. [S. 132, 260A]

PCIT v. International Coal Ventures Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 472 ITR 307 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 56: Income from other sources-Capital or revenue receipt-Capital work in progress-Interest earned prior to commencement of business on funds received in form of share capital for specific purpose of acquisition of coal mines-Part of capital cost and to be treated as capital work-in-progress.[S. 4, 57(iii), 260A]

PCIT v. Jas Forwarding Pvt. Ltd. (2024) 473 ITR 502 (Delhi) (HC) PCIT v. Jas Forwarding Worldwide (I) Pvt Ltd (2024) 473 ITR 502 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Fees for technical services-Reimbursement to non-resident AEs-Revenue unable to prove that payments are FTS-Disallowance deleted. [S. 9(1)(vii), 195, 260A]

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

S.37(1): Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Payments made by an assessee for the use of a logo or trademark for a particular period, aimed at business improvement/expansion, qualify as revenue expenditure.[S. 260A]

PCIT, Central v. Onehub Chennai Pvt. Ltd. [2025] 302 Taxman 497 (Delhi)(HC)

S.37(1): Business expenditure-Bogus expenses-Double taxation-Two constituent entities already offered to tax certain amounts out of receipts of aggregate amounts from assessee-Same amount not liable to be taxed in the hands of the assessee as it would amount to double taxation.[S. 260A]

CIT v. Desouza Hotels Ltd. (2025) 473 ITR 368 (Bom.) (HC)

S. 36(1)(vii) :Bad debt-It is sufficient for the debt to be written off as irrecoverable in the assessee’s accounts to be eligible for deduction, without the need to prove that the debt has actually become bad. [S. 36(2), 260A]

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]