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. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Infrastructure development-Wind Mill-loss prior to initial assessment year which had already been set off, could not be brought forward and adjusted against profits of eligible business. [S. 80IA(5)]

Zaveri & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 184 ITD 777 (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Business counselling charges-Payment to bogus companies-Reassessment is held to be justified-Disallowance is held to be justified. [S.143(1), 147, 148]

Jaee Vishwas Joshi v. ACIT (2020) 184 ITD 112 / 2021) 211 TTJ 311 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Purchase of raw material-purported excess money had been received back-Deletion of addition is held to be valid.

DCIT v. Gulshan Chemicals Ltd. (2020) 184 ITD 71 / 208 TTJ 1053 / (2021) 197 DTR 274 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Search-Jewellery to extent stated in CBDT Instruction No. 1916, dated 11-5-1996 stands explained. [S. 132]

N. Roja v. ACIT (2020) 184 ITD 329 / 196 DTR 134 / 208 TTJ 603 (Cuttack)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Cash deposit in bank-Reflected in cash book and tallied with sales register-Addition cannot be made as cash credits [S. 145]

ITO v. Yashovardhan Tyagi. (2020) 184 ITD 461 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Share application money-Share premium-Identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of share applicants were established-Addition is held to be not justified.

Satyam Smertex (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2020) 184 ITD 357 (Kol.) (Trib.)

S. 56 : Income from other sources-Stamp valuation-Objection raised first time before CIT(A)-Valuation of property-Power of CIT(A) is coterminous powers with Assessing Officer, matter should have been referred for valuation to Departmental Valuation Officer-Matter remanded to the file of CIT(A) with the direction to refer the matter to Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO). [S. 45, 55A, 56(2)(ii)(b)]

Jaykishan Parchani v. ITO (2020) 184 ITD 323 (Indore)(Trib.)

S. 54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Possession was not taken-Unfit for habitation-Owner of more than one house-Not eligible to claim deduction. [S. 45]

Chandramohan Manohar Potdar v. CIT (2020) 184 ITD 907 / 208 TTJ 112/ (2021)201 DTR 131 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Possession of flat was taken within period of two years from date of transfer of original asset-Entitled for benefit. [S. 45]

Rajiv Madhok v. ACIT (2020) 184 ITD 378/ 80 ITR 427 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 54B : Capital gains-Land used for agricultural purposes-Purchase of new agricultural land prior to due date of filing return-Entitle to exemption. [S. 45, 139(1)]

Anil Kumar Nuwal v. ACIT (2020) 184 ITD 760/196 DTR 113/208 TTJ 637 (Jodhpur)(Trib.)