Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


DCIT (E) v. UTI India Fund Unit Scheme 1986 (2024) 228 TTJ 607 / 237 DTR 44 / 38 NYPTTJ 126 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 10(23D) : Mutual Fund-Exemption-Approved by Government and Reserve Bank of India-Eligible for exemption-Order of CIT(A) is affirmed. [UTI India Fund Unit Scheme, 1986, Unit Trust of India Act, 1963]

DIT v. Ut Starcom Inc. (2023) 155 taxmann.com 117 /37 NYPTTJ 923 (2024) 228 TTJ 479 / 236 DTR 339 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Supply of telecommunication hardware with software-Receipt is not taxable as royalty-Not liable to pay interest u/s. 234B-DTAA-India-USA. [S. 90, 195, 234B, Art. 7, 12]

Royal Twinkle Star Club (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 152 taxmann.com 374 / 37 NYPTTJ 334 / (2024) 228 TTJ 991 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Subscription received by assessee from members towards holidays membership schemes—Entries in the books of account is not conclusive-Collective investment schemes(CIS)-Advances for sales-Deposits-The deposits received from the members cannot be treated as revenue receipt-Capital receipt.[S.40(a)(ia), 145, 194A, 195]

Padma Rao (Ms.) v. CIT (2024) 159 taxmann.com 30 /228 TTJ 109 / 235 DTR 193 / 38 NYPTTJ 136 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Capital or revenue-Business income-Compensation-Other payments-Income chargeable to tax-Compensation for termination (nonrenewal) of professional contract-Profession-Retrenchment-Freelance journalist-Compensation being capital receipt is not taxable. [S. 4, 28(ii)(e), 32(1)(iv), 56(2)(xi), Industrial Relations Code, 2020, S. 2(ZA)]

Nilons Enterprises (P) Ltd. v. JCIT (2023) 37 NYPTTJ 1363 (2024) 227 TTJ 757 / 234 DTR 9 / 161 taxmann.com 566 (Pune)(Trib)

S.271D: Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Book adjustment entries-No violation of section. 269SS-Penalty is deleted. [S. 269SS]

Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. PCIT (2023) 157 taxmann.com 195 / 37 NYPTTJ 1306 /(2024) 227 TTJ 870 / 239 DTR 247 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Reassessment-Lack of proper enquiry-Issues not subject-matter of reassessment-Issue which is not subject matter of reassessment, Commissioner cannot direct the Assessing Officer to carry out the enquiry as suggested by the Commissioner. [S. 37(1), 40A(2)(vi), 40A(2)(b), 147, 148]

ITO v. Bishambhar Dayal Agrawal (2024) 227 TTJ 38 (UO)/ 161 taxmann.com 1063 (Raipur) (Trib)

S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Cross objection-Performance guarantee-Deposit-Jurisdictional issue-Ground raised orally-Validity of reassessment-Respondent can raise the issue orally-CIT(A) deleted the addition on merits-Revenue appeal-The Respondent can raise the grounds of validity of reassessment-Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, does not propose raising the objection in writing-The respondent is well within his right to raise the ground orally-Reassessment is quashed on change of opinion. [S. 37, 69, 147, 148, ITAT R.1963, 27]

ITO v. K. Murugan (2023) 37 NYPTTJ 861 / (2024) 227 TTJ 121 / 233 DTR 72 (Chennai)(Trib)

S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Dismissal of appeal-Ex parte order-CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal on merits. [S.246A]

Bheru Lal Garg v.ITO (2023) 157 taxmann.com 602/ 37 NYPTTJ 1684/ (2024) 227 TTJ 356 / 233 DTR 353 (Jodhpur)(Trib)

S. 206C : Collection at source-Trading-Forest produce-Minor forest product-Forest product-Vegetable and animal origin, such as grasses, bamboos, canes, tans, dyes, oils, gums, resins, fibres, flosses, leaves, drugs, spices, poisons, edible products and animal prod-Minor forest products-Not liable to collect tax at source Agricultural product in the nature of Mahua Oil, Puhad, Ambadi, Dolma Kanji, Ratanjot and the cattle feed (Bhusa and Khal), etc. is not liable to collect tax at source. [S. 206C(1), 206C(6A), 206C(7) ]

Vivriti Cibus 013 2017 v. ITO [2023] 157 taxmann.com 273/37 NYPTTJ 1641 / (2024) 227 TTJ 1 / 233 DTR 188 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 194LBC : Deduction at source-Investment in securitization trust-Assessee in default-Excess Interest Spread by securitization trust group-Pass through certificates by originator-No liability to deduct TDS from the payment of Excess Interest Spread by securitization trust-Not an assessee in default. [S.115TCA, Explanation (d), 201(1)]