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. 54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house–Purchase of flat from builder-Date of allotment to be taken as date of acquisition of property-House consisted of several independent units–Exemption cannot be denied–New house need not be purchased exclusively in the name of the assesee-Invested prior to date of filing of return u/s. 139(4)–Eligible for exemption. [S. 45, 139(1), 139(4)]

Kamal Murlidhar Mokashi (Mrs.) v. ITO (2019) 179 ITD 265/( 2020) 194 DTR 99/ 206 TTJ 100 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 54EC : Capital gains-Investment in bonds-Transferable Development Right (TDR)-Acquisition of immovable property is capital asset-Period of holding of TDR was to be calculated from date of acquisition of assessee’s property by municipality. [S 2(14), 43(5), 45, 48].

Adi D. Vachha v. ITO (2019) 179 ITD 356 /(2020) 194 DTR 142/ 206 TTJ 166 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 45 : Capital gains-Taxable in the hands of owner and not in the hands of General Power of Attorney holder. [S. 2(47)]

Veerannagiri Gopal Reddy v. ITO (2019) 72 ITR 578 / 179 ITD 305 (Hyd.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure–Ad-hoc disallowance of 10% of total expenses-Books of account not rejected–Submitted the details of expenses-Ad-hoc disallowance is held to be not justified. [S. 145]

TUV India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 75 ITR 364 / 179 ITD 238 /( 2020) 191 DTR 246/ 204 TTJ 192 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Difference of opinion between assessee’s and AO’s view for claim of exemption u/s.47(xiv) on conversion of proprietary concern in to public limited company-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid. [S. 47(xiv)]

ITO v. Kantilal G. Kotecha. (2019) 178 ITD 1/ 202 TTJ 517/ 183 DTR 489 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 268A : Appeal–Revised monetary limits–Applicable to pending appeals and also appeals to be filed. [S. 253]

ITO v. Aditya Buildwell (P.) Ltd. (2019) 179 ITD 549 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record – Order of Tribunal affirmed by High Court-Coordinate bench of Tribunal, subsequent to decision of High court could not have entertained miscellaneous application of assessee and recalled order originally passed by Tribunal. [S. 260A]

Yum! Restaurants Marketing (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 179 ITD 480/ (2020) 190 DTR 84/ 205 TTJ 124 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Power-Additional evidence-Tribunal is empowered to admit additional evidences in the interest of substantial justice. [ITAT, R.29]

Yum! Restaurants Marketing (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 179 ITD 480/(2020) 190 DTR 84/ 205 TTJ 124 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)–Powers–Undisclosed investment in property-Non speaking order–Matter remanded to CIT(A).[S. 69B, 147, 148]

Balwan Singh v. ITO (2019) 179 ITD 577 (Chd.)(Trib.)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)–Powers–Estimation of gross profit–Right of appeal was not properly exercised–Matter remanded to the CIT(A). [S. 254(1)]

Jiwan Lal v. ITO (2019) 179 ITD 475 (Chd.)(Trib.)