This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws

S. 115JB : Book profit-Disallowance under Section 14A not to be included while computing book profit. [S. 14A]

Ameya Logistics Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 83 ITR 46 (SN) (Mum.) (Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Comparable-Matter remanded-Adjustment for working capital difference nor working provided-Addition is held to be justified.

Open Solutions Software Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Add.CIT (2020) 83 ITR 21 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Working capital adjustment granted-Outstanding receivables part of working capital-No separate benchmarking warranted.

Dy. CIT (LTU) v. EXL Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 83 ITR 11 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 80P : Co-operative societies-Business of Banking and disbursement of agricultural loans-Assessing Officer director to examine each loan disbursement to determine its purpose-Matter remanded. [S. 80P(2)]

Mugu Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. ITO (2020) 83 ITR 85 (SN) (Cochin)(Trib.)

S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings -Initial Assessment year-Option given by CBDT to assessee to choose initial Assessment year-Prior period depreciation on investment in premises. [S. 80IA (4)(iv)(a) , 119]

ACIT v. Suma Shilp Ltd. (2020)83 ITR 39 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Infrastructure development- Development, Maintenance and operation of Industrial Park. [S. 80IA(4)(iii)]

Dy. CIT v. Marigold Premises Pvt. Ltd. (2020)83 ITR 32 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Infrastructure development-Container freight station-Eligible for deduction. [S. 80IA(4)]

Ameya Logistics Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 83 ITR 46 (SN) (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Agricultural activity-Purchase of property-Addition is held to not justified. [S. 147, 148]

Raj Devi (Smt.) v. ITO (2020)83 ITR 84 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credit-Cash deposited in bank account-Peak credit-Failure to decide the source of deposit and purpose of withdrawal-Not entitle to benefit of peak credit.

Varun Gupta v. ITO (2020) 83 ITR 82 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Share premium-Valuation report was filed- Assessing Officer failing to examine bank accounts from where investment routed to investigate creditworthiness of creditors, identity of subscribers and genuineness of transaction-Deletion of addition is held to be justified.

ITO v. Aravali Prime Consultants P. Ltd. (2020) 83 ITR 2 (SN) (Jaipur) (Trib.)