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. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence- Additional cost of construction incurred within stipulated time though not deposited in capital gains account—Entitled to deduction. [S. 45, 54F, 264, Art.226]

Venkata Dilip Kumar (HUF) v. CIT (2019) 419 ITR 298/ (2020) 312 CTR 26/ 185 DTR 45/ 268 Taxman 111 (Mad.)(HC) .Editorial : Affirmed by division bench , CIT v. Venkata Dilip Kumar (2021)437 ITR 137 (Mad) (HC)

S. 45 : Capital gains–Transfer of land to developer-No Objection Certificate obtained in June 1994-Built-up area handed over in financial year relevant to AY. 2001-02-Transfer took place when agreement for development of land was approved-Cost of construction referred in the agreement is held to be reasonable-Developer providing rent free accommodation is not assessable as capital gains-Sale of land and residential house to developer-Construction of residential house by developer-Entitled to exemption. [S. 2(47)(v), 54, 54F, 269UL, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, S. 53A]

P. Madhusudhan v. ACIT (2019)419 ITR 194/(2020) 189 DTR 163 (Mad)(HC)

S. 44C : Non-residents-Head office expenditure-Entire expenditure was for purposes of head office-No restrictions in terms could be imposed-Order of Tribunal is affirmed. [S. 260A]

CIT v. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corpn. Ltd. (2019) 267 Taxman 502 / 111 taxmann.com 284 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed as the tax effect involved of less than 2 crores, CIT v. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corpn. Ltd. (2019) 267 Taxman 501 (SC)

S. 44BB : Mineral oils–Computation-Unabsorbed depreciation-Carried forward from earlier year-Cannot be set off against while computing the profits and gains of eligible business u/s. 44BB of the Act. [S. 32(2)]

Boskalia International Dredging v. DIT(IT) (2019) 182 DTR 148/(2020) 313 CTR 360 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 43CA : Transfer of assets-other than capital assets-Full value of consideration-stock in trade-Agreement value–Stamp valuation-Provision introduced with effect from 1-4-2014 for deeming consideration received on sale of goods/assets on basis of stamp duty valuation would be applicable prospectively-Rejection of books of account is held to be not justified. [S.50C, 145]

PCIT v. Swananda Properties (P.) Ltd. (2019) 267 Taxman 429 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 43B : Certain deductions on actual payment –Bonus-Allowable as deduction in the year of payment.[ S.37(1) ]

CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (2019)419 ITR 100/(2020) 274 Taxman 258 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax-Remission or cessation of trading liability – Matter remanded to the AO consider the evidences and pass the order. [S. 260A]

V.R. Swaminathan v. ITO (2019) 267 Taxman 208/ 184 DTR 1/(2020) 313 CTR 738 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 40A(2) : Expenses or payments not deductible–Excessive or unreasonable-Payment made by the assessee firm to three sub-contractors out of 21 work contracts given by it was to the relatives of the partners of the firm-20% disallowance is held to be justified. [S. 37(1), 40A(2)(b)]

Akrati Promoters And Developers v. DCIT (2019) 183 DTR 204 / (2020) 268 Taxman 83 (All.)(HC)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Second proviso to S.40(a)(ia) inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 is declaratory and curative in nature and it has retrospective effect from 1st April 2005, being the date from which sub-cl.(ia) of S. 40(a) was inserted–No disallowance can be made for failure to deduct tax at source. [S. 201(1), 271C]

CIT v. S.M. Anand (2019) 182 DTR 153 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source– Subsidiary company-Reimbursement of expenses-Not liable to deduct tax at source-No disallowance can be made. [S. 195]

PCIT v. Manugraph India (P) Ltd. (2019) 267 Taxman 437 (Bom.) (HC)