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

Interpretation of taxing statutes – Royalties – Double Taxation Avoidance agreements – Liberal construction- DTAA -India – Singapore [S. 9(1) (vi), 195 , Art, 3, 12 (3) , 30 ]

Engineering Analysis Centre Of Excellence P. Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 432 ITR 471/199 DTR 361/ 319 CTR 497/ 281 taxman 19/ 125 taxmann.com 42 (SC) Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd v. DIT CIT ( 2021) 432 ITR 471/199 DTR 361/ 319 CTR 497 / 125 taxmann.com 42 ( SC) /DIT v. Ericsson A.B . ( 2021) 432 ITR 471/199 DTR 361/ 319 CTR 497 / 125 taxmann.com 42 ( SC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Royalty – Computer software not royalty – Right to reproduce and right to use computer software separate rights -Not liable to deduct tax at source – Agreement has to be read as a whole , real nature of transaction to be seen reading agreement as a whole – DTAA – India – Singapore -India -China – Japan – Kingdom -USA [S. 2(7) , 2(37A, ) 4 , 5, 90 (2),195 ,201 (IA ) , Copyright Act, 1957, S .2(A ), 52(1)(aa) , Art , 3 (2) 12(3) 30 ]

Engineering Analysis Centre Of Excellence P. Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 432 ITR 471/199 DTR 361/ 319 CTR 497 (SC) / Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd v. DIT CIT ( 2021) 432 ITR 471/199 DTR 361/ 319 CTR 497 / 125 taxmann.com 42 ( SC)/DIT v. Ericsson A.B . ( 2021) 432 ITR 471/199 DTR 361/ 319 CTR 497 / 125 taxmann.com 42 ( SC) www.itatonline .org Editorial: CIT v. Alcatel Lucent Canada ( 2015 ) 372 TR 476 ( Delhi) (HC) affirmed , CIT v. Samsung Electronics Co Ltd ( 2012 ) 345 ITR 494 ( Karn) (HC) CIT v. Sunray Computers P.Ltd ( 2012 ) 348 ITR 196 ( Karn) (HC) , AAR in Citrix Systems Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd , Inn re ( 2012 ) 343 ITR 1 (AAR ) reversed .

Constitution of India .

Art . 141 : Law declared by Supreme Court to be binding on all courts – Covid -19 – Limitation – State and Central Acts – Directions issued for exclusion of period from March 15, 2020 to March 14, 2021 — Remaining period to apply from March 14, 2021- [ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 S, 23(4) , 29A, Commercial Courts Act, 2015 , S.12A, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 ]

Cognizance for extension of limitation, In Re (2021) 432 ITR 206 (SC)

Income Declaration Scheme , 2016

S. 191 : Tax paid under the Scheme shall not be refunded – Paid two instalments – Default in paying final instalment – Not entitle to get the refund already pad . [ S. 183, 185 Art, 226 ]

Yogesh Roshanlal Gupta v .CBDT (2021) 432 ITR 91 /199 DTR 81/ 319 CTR 389 / 280 Taxman 278(Guj) (HC).Editorial: On appeal , the honourable Supreme Court directed that the assessee be given benefit of the amounts deposited towards first two instalments while reckoning the tax liability of the assessee after revised assessment , Yogesh Roshanlal Gupta v .CBDT ( 2022) 442 ITR 31 (SC)

S. 275 : Penalty-Bar of limitation-limitation begins to run from date of order of Appellate Tribunal was served upon Commissioner (Judicial). [S. 271(1)(c), 275(1)(a)]

PCIT v. Indian Sugar Exim Corpn. Ltd. (2020) 115 taxmann.com 266 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Indian Sugar Exim Corpn. Ltd. (2020) 272 Taxman 185 (SC)

S. 271D : Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Amount received from sister concern in a running account were held not to constitute as an infraction under Section 269SS-Tribunal should have remanded matter back-Order of penalty was set aside. [S. 254(1), 269SS]

Asian Consolidated Industries Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2020) 114 taxmann.com 105 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed Dy.CIT v. Asian Consolidated Industries Ltd. (2020) 270 Taxman 184 (SC)

S. 271D : Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Depositors belonged to rural areas where adequate banking facilities were not available-Deletion of penalty is held to be justified. [S. 269SS]

PCIT v. Sahara India Financial Corpn. Ltd. (2020) 119 taxmann.com 284 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Sahara India Financial Corpn. Ltd. (2020) 274 Taxman 214 (SC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Writ against penalty order is not maintainable when the quantum addition is in challenge before Appellate Authorities. [S. 144, 271(1))(b), Art. 226]

Vikas Bhatnagar v. ITO (2020) 120 taxmann.com 461 (AP)(HC) Editorial : SLP of assessee is dismissed, Vikas Bhatnagar v. ITO (2020) 275 Taxman 594(SC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Not declared capital gain arising from sale of leasehold rights-Deletion of penalty is held to be justified. [S. 45, 54EC]

PCIT v. Ashok Kumar Maneklal Parikh (2020) 120 taxmann.com 268 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Ashok Kumar Maneklal Parikh (2020) 274 Taxman 457 (SC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Disallowance of claim-Appeal pending before High Court-Reasonable explanation-Deletion of penalty is held to be justified. [S. 36 (1)(iii)]

PCIT v. National Diary Development Board (2020) 114 taxmann.com 553 (Guj.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed PCIT v. National Diary Development Board (2020) 270 Taxman 6 (SC)