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. 145 : Method of accounting–Stock valuation-Cash credit limits-Discrepancy in stock as per books of account of assessee and that shown in bank statements–Deletion of addition is held to be justified.

PCIT v. Janam Steel and Alloys (2019) 108 taxmann.com 349 / 265 Taxman 552 (Guj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP is granted to the revenue; PCIT v. Janam Steel and Alloys (2019) 265 Taxman 551 (SC)

S. 145 : Method of accounting–Stock valuation of gold-LIFO method of valuation–Recognised in law–No substantial question of law. [S. 260A]

CIT v. Sharad Mohanlal Shah (2019) 108 taxmann.com 35 (Guj.) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed, CIT v. Sharad Mohanlal Shah. (2019) 265 Taxman 539 (SC)

S. 145 : Method of accounting–Trading in rice-Assessing Officer was justified in accepting two entries relating to profits and disregarding other two entries concerning losses.

Marhur Marketing (P) Ltd. v. CIT (2006) 281 ITR 379/ 151 Taxman 123 (Delhi ) (HC) Editorial : SLP of assessee is dismissed, Mathur Marketing (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 265 Taxman 316 (SC)

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment–Statutory remedy of appeal is available-Writ is held to be not maintainable. [S. 246, Art. 226]

Ram Pal Singh v. CIT (2019) 265 Taxman 51 (Mag.) (Uttarakhand)(HC)

S. 143(2) : Assessment–Notice–Issue of notice beyond period prescribed in proviso to S.143(2)–Assessment is barred by limitation.

Bihar Police Building Construction Corporation (P.) Ltd. v. P CIT (2019) 265 Taxman 373 / (2020) 187 DTR 449/ 313 CTR 806(Patna) (HC)

S. 143(2) : Assessment–Notice-Non service of notice with in limitation period–Order is bad in law-Provision of S.292BB cannot be invoked since assessee neither appeared nor co-operated in inquiry during assessment proceedings as the order was passed u/s. 144 of the Act. [S. 144 , 292BB, Art. 226]

Nittur Vasanth Kumar Mahesh v. ACIT (2019) 265 Taxman 277/ 311 CTR 332/ 183 DTR 150 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 115JA : Book profit-Provision for bad and doubtful debts is a provision for unascertained liability, and thus, same could not be excluded while computing book profits-Provision made for payment of purchase tax, payment of purchase tax on cane subsidy and provision for wealth tax, in anticipation of Government Notification, were provisions for unascertained liability, liable to be added back while computing book profits. [S. 36(1)(vii)]

EID Parry (India) Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 265 Taxman 454 / (2020)425 ITR 508 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 92CA : Reference to transfer pricing officer – AO is not bound to pass draft assessment order in tune with arm’s length price fixed by TPO-AO having rejected valuation of shares made by TPO, made addition to assessee’s income in respect of excess price paid for buy-back of shares-Writ was dismissed-liberty is given to the to the assessee raise all the issues before the Dispute Resolution Panel. [S. 2(22) (iv), 46A,56(1), 92CA 94, 115QA, 144C, Companies Act, 1956, S.72A, R.11UA, Art. 226]

Cognizant (Mauritius) Ltd. v. DCIT(IT) (2019) 265 Taxman 387/ 310 CTR 321/181 DTR 154 (Mad.)(HC)/Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation v Dy .CIT ( 2019) 310 CTR 321/ 181 DTR 154 ( Mad) (HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arms’ length price-Services of application design, software engineering and technology cannot be compared with a company providing software support services.

PCIT v. ZTE Telecom India (P.) Ltd. (2019) 265 Taxman 70 (Mag.) (P& H)( HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing–Transportation cost-Not able to establish that cost of transportation in comparable case was lesser than assessee-Adjustment is held to be valid. [S. 260A]

Indian Additives Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 265 Taxman 383 (Mad.) (HC)