S. 90 : Double taxation agreement-Rate of tax–Applicable to domestic company and not 65%-CBDT Circular is held to be applicable-DTAA-India-Japan. [Art. 7, 23, 24(2)]
Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 310 CTR 479 / 181 DTR 220 (Cal.) (HC)S. 90 : Double taxation agreement-Rate of tax–Applicable to domestic company and not 65%-CBDT Circular is held to be applicable-DTAA-India-Japan. [Art. 7, 23, 24(2)]
Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 310 CTR 479 / 181 DTR 220 (Cal.) (HC)S. 80P : Co-operative societies–Denial of exemption-Alternative remedy – Directed to avail alternative remedy u/s. 246A of the Act. [S. 246A, Art. 226, Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983]
K274 Uthukuli Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 267 Taxman 374 (Mad.)(HC)S. 72 : Loss-Carry forward and set off-scheme sanctioned by BIFR-Objection by Revenueto grant tax concession- Writ is held to be not maintainable . . [S. 72A, Sick industrial companies (Special provisions) Act, 1985, S. 18, 19, Art,226 ]
Olympia Industries Ltd. v. UOI (2019) 181 DTR 253/ (2020) 312 CTR 248 / / 424 ITR 202 (Bom.)(HC)S. 69A : Income from undisclosed sources–No evidence to show that cheques stated to have been issued by the assessee-Deletion of addition is held to be justified.
CIT v. Anoop Jain (2019) 182 DTR 291/311 CTR 58 /( 2020) 268 Taxman 427 / 424 ITR 115 (Delhi)(HC)S. 69 : Unexplained investment-Income from undisclosed sources- Jewellery converted to bullion and sold–Sale proceeds through bank –Addition cannot be made as income from undisclosed sources. [Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997]
N. R. Gangavathi (HUF), Basavaraj Kamatgi (HUF) v. ITO (2019) 419 ITR 469/ 311 CTR 625/ 184 DTR 375 (Karn.)(HC) Basavaraj Kamatgi (HUF) v. ITO (2019) 419 ITR 469 /311 CTR 625/ 184 DTR 375(Karn.) (HC)S. 69 : Un explained investment-Income from undisclosed sources- Non-Resident-Deposit in NRI Accounts–Deletion of addition by the Tribunal based on the evidences–Reversal of the order of Tribunal by the High Court is held to be not valid–Oder of the Tribunal is affirmed. [S.158BB, 260A, Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, S.13]
Purshottam Khatri v. CIT (2019) 419 ITR 475 / 267 Taxman 503/ ( 2020) 312 CTR 323/ 185 DTR 177 (SC) Editorial : Decision in CIT v Purshottam Khatri (2006) 203 CTR 1/(2007) 290 ITR 260 (MP) (HC ) is reversed.S. 68 : Cash credits-Bank statement or identity of creditor is not sufficient to prove the creditworthiness of creditor-Confirmation and income tax return is not produced-Addition is held to be justified.
Siddharth Export v. ACIT (2019) 183 DTR 361 / 311 CTR 663 / (2020) 268 Taxman 121 (Delhi)(HC)S. 68 : Cash credits–Advance received-Produced bank statements and other details produced–Discharged the burden-Deletion of addition as cash credits is held to be justified.
PCIT v. Skylark Build (2019) 180 DTR 266 (Bom.) (HC)S. 68 : Cash credits–Genuineness of purchases could not be established – Addition as cash credit is held to be justified.
PCIT v. Wadhawan Designs (2019) 184 DTR 299/(2020) 313 CTR 173 (Delhi)(HC)S. 54B : Capital gains-Land used for agricultural purposes–Sale of new asset of agricultural land within lock in period of three years– Withdrawal of exemption is held to be valid–Capital gains is chargeable to tax in the year in which transfer of asset is effected. [S. 45]
Hitesh Mansukhlal Bagdai v. ACIT (2019)419 ITR 276 (Guj) (HC)