S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-No satisfaction recorded- Disallowance not sustainable. [R. 8D(2)(ii)]
Dy. CIT (LTU) v. EXL Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 83 ITR 11 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)
Digest of case laws
Online digest of latest case laws
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. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Only investments yielding exempt income during year to be considered for computing average value of investments. [R. 8D]
Ameya Logistics Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 83 ITR 46 (SN) (Mum.) (Trib.)S. 12AA : Procedure for registration-rust or institution-Delay of 158 days in filing the appeal was condoned-Documents which was not produced before the CIT(E) was produced before the Appellate Tribunal-Matter remanded. [S. 12AA, 80G, 253, 254(1)]
Delhi Agroha Vikas Trust v. CIT (E) (2020)83 ITR 26 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib.)S. 10B : Export oriented undertakings-Sale of scrap-Entitled to deduction.
Dy. CIT (LTU) v. EXL Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2020)83 ITR 11 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib.)S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Sales tax subsidy-For enabling to expand or modernize its existing unit-A capital receipt not taxable.
Dy. CIT v. Grasim Industries Ltd. (2020) 83 ITR 1 (SN) (Mum.)(Trib.)Interpretation of taxing statutes –Precedent – Special leave Petition dismissed in limine- Doctrine of merger is not applicable . [ Constitution ion of India , Art , 141, Maharashtra Employees of private Schools ( Conditions of Service ) Regulation Act , S. 4(1) 16(2) (a) ]
Dhiraj Manoharro Chore v. State of Maharashtra AIR 2020 Bom 65 (FB)S. 271B :Penalty- Failure to get accounts audited -Reasonable cause – May – Levy of penalty is held go be not justified .
Arvind Kumar Arora v. ITO (2020)82 ITR 28 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib)S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment – Disallowance of expenses on estimate basis – Capital or revenue –Debatable issue – Levy of penalty is not justified – Disallowance was deleted -Levy of penalty is not justified . [ S.14A ]
Piramal Healthcare Ltd. v .Dy. CIT (2020)82 ITR 47 (SN)(Mum) (Trib)S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty – Concealment – No specific charge recorded – addition on estimate basis – Appeal not filed against quantum addition – Levy of penalty is not justified . [ S.274 ]
Arvind Kumar Arora v. ITO (2020)82 ITR 28 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib)S. 271(1)(b) : Penalty – Failure to comply with notices – Entire
additions deleted at appellate stage —Bona fide explanation- Penalty not leviable. [ S.142(1) ]