S. 9(1)(i): Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Business connection – Income attributable to permanent establishment -Project office in India cannot be construed as fixed place hence cannot be considered as permanent establishment- Deletion of addition by the High Court is affirmed – DTAA- India -Republic of Korea [ Art.5 (1), 7 ]
DIT (IT) v .Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd (2020)426 ITR 1 / 192 DTR 1/ 315 CTR 622 /272 Taxman 366 (SC ) www.itatonline.org Editorial: Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. v. DIT (IT) & Anr. (2014) 221 Taxman 315 / 265 CTR 109/98 DTR 89 (Uttarakhand)(HC), affirmed
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 Indian Contract Act , 1872
S. 59 : Application of payment where debt to be discharged is indicated – Apportionment between interest and principal- Firstly in payment of interest and cost therfater payment of principal amount , unless a specific direction contained in the decree or contract . [ S 60 , 61 ]
Constitution of India, 1949
Art. 311 (2) :Dismissal or removal -Disciplinary enquiry – Documents furnishing foundation of charge sheet must be supplied- Principle of natural justice is violated – Dismissal was held to be not vald .
Transfer of property Act ,1882
S.106: Duration ofn certain lease – Servicing of Notice –Notce sent by registered poat recived back wth report not present -No presumption can be drawn unless something more is proved by cogenet evidence that it was refised. [ Code of Civil procedure ,1908 , Order v , General Clauses Act , 1897 , S 27, Indian Evidence Act ,1872 S.114(f) ]
Rama Nand v. Mulakh Raj & Anr. AIR 2010 (NOC) 921 (P & H)Land Acquisition Act, 1894
S.5A:Hearing of objections- Natural justice – Objective Application of mind to the objections raised – Officer hearing objection should himself decide objections and give report- Successor decides the case without giving a fresh hearing, the order would stand vitiated having been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. [ S.5C ]
UOI v. Shiv Raj; AIR 2014 SC 2242Limitation Act ,1963
S.5: Extension of prescribed period in certain cases – Sufficient cause – Condonation of Delay – Delay of 3671 days – No reason to decline benefit merely due to delay in filing of appeal when in similar cases benefit was derived by similar concerns [ Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ,S. 18, 54]
K. Subbarayudu and Ors. v. The Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) (2017) 12 Supreme Court Cases 840S. 254(2A): Appellate Tribunal –Stay- Special Bench – Amendment in first proviso to s. 254(2A) by the Finance Act 2020,- whether directory or mandatory – Reference to special Bench .[ S.253 ]
Tata Education and Development Trust v .ACIT (2020) 117 taxmann.com 500 (Mum) (Trib) www.itatonline .org .S.147: Reassessment – Non -Resident- information from investigation wing of the income tax department- Return the asseeee has shown as resident –Foreign Bank deposits- Reassessment is held to be valid [ S.6(1) ,9(1), 148 ]
Renu T Tharani (Ms) v .Dy.CIT (IT) ( 2020) 184 ITD 565/ 192 DTR 9/ 206 TTJ 521 (Mum) (Trib) www.itatonline.orgS. 69 :Unexplained investments- Cash credits – Sole beneficiary of trust – Foreign Bank depositsThe sum of Rs 196 crore held by HSBC Pvt Bank, Switzerland, in the name of Tharani Family Trust, of which the assessee was a beneficiary, is assessable as the undisclosed income of the assessee. [ S.68 , 147 , 148 ]
Renu T Tharani (Ms) v .Dy.CIT (IT) ( 2020) 184 ITD 565/ 192 DTR 9/ 206 TTJ 521 (Mum) (Trib) www.itatonline.orgS. 10(38) : Long term capital gains from equities -Penny stocks – Produced contract notes, demat statements etc & discharged the onus of proving that the shares were bought and sold -Merely relying upon the statement of investigation wing , the transaction cannot be treated as bogus- Denial of exemption is held to be not valid – Reassessment is held to be valid . [ S.45 , 68 147 ,148 ]
Suresh Kumar Agarwal v. ACIT (2020) 117 taxmann.com 678( Delhi) (Trib) www.itatonline.org