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. 92A:Transfer pricing- Arm’s length price – Associated enterprises – Two enterprises can be treated as associated enterprises- Judgements of non jurisdictional High Courts are binding on the Tribunal- Addition is deleted . [ S. 92A(2) , 92C ]
Kayee Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO ( 2020) 188 DTR 1/ 204 TTJ 921 (Mum.)(Trib) www.itatonline.org
S. 90 :Double taxation relief – Once an income of an Indian assessee is taxable in the treaty partner source jurisdiction under a treaty provision, the same cannot be included in its total income taxable in India as well i.e. the residence jurisdiction, is no longer good law in view of s. 90(3) inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2004-The mere amendment or substitution of a section does not affect the validity of notifications, circulars and instructions- Addition made by the AO is confirmed . .[ S. 90(3)144C ]
Tecnimont Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (Mum)(Trib), www.itatonline.org
S. 80IA :Industrial undertakings – Conversion of a partnership firm into a company- Part IX of Companies Act- As per S. 575 of the Companies Act, the conversion of a partnership firm into a company under Part IX causes a statutory vesting of all assets of the firm into the company without the need for a conveyance-The business of the firm is carried on by the company and the latter is eligible for the benefits of S. 80IA (4) of the Act . [ S.80IA(4) , Companies Act , S.575 ]
CIT v. Chetak Enterprises Pvt. Ltd (2020) 423 ITR 267/ 313 CTR 489/ 187 DTR 351/115 taxmann.com 108 / 272 Taxman 509(SC) ,www.itatonline.org
S. 12AA : Procedure for registration –Trust or institution- Proposed activities –Registration cannot be refused on the ground that no activities are carried out .
Ananada Social and Education Trust v. CIT (SC), www.itatonline.org
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure –Providing gifts to Medical practitioners by pharmaceutical companies –CBDT circular silent about pharmaceutical companies – Circular had no retrospective effect – Prohibition imposed by Indian Medical Council against acceptance of gift is on the medical practitioner and doctor and not on the pharmaceutical companies -Disallowance is deleted .
ACIT v. J. B. Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2019) 177 DTR 378/ 199 TTJ 600 (Mum)(Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Levy of interest for withholding payment of VAT- Compensatory interest u/s 30(2) – For delay in payment of additional tax under MVAT – Penal interest u/s 30(4) – Concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income – Paid by assessee to buy peace and end litigation with MVAT authorities – AO asked to bifurcate these payments – Compensatory interest allowed – Penal Interest disallowed. [ MVAT Act , 2002 , S.30(2) 30(4) ]
ACIT v. Gini & Jony Ltd. (2019) 178 DTR 114 /197 TTJ 322 (Mum)(Trib.)
S. 80IB(10) : Housing projects- Date of agreement with land owner dated 11-07 -1997 – Approval of project by local authority was on 30 -09 1998 – Project completed before 31-03 2008 – Entitle to deduction .
CIT v. Arun Excello ( 2019) 113 taxmann.com 347 (Mad) (HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect ; CIT v. Arun Excello (2020] 269 Taxman 18 (SC)
S. 271B : Penalty–Failure to get accounts audited-Assessee bona fide in treating commission income as turnover along with other turnover which was below limit for audit -Department treating unaccounted turnover as part of total turnover holding assessee liable for penalty for failure to get accounts audited -Penalty liable to be deleted.
Vinay Agrawal v. ITO (2019) 76 ITR 16 (SN) (Indore)(Trib.)
S. 271C : Penalty-Failure to deduct at source–bonafide belief–whether payee is in the category of government or local authority–No penalty is leviable.
Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. Pr.CIT (2019) 175 DTR 30 / 69 ITR 585/ 197 TTJ 889 (Delhi)(Trib.)
S. 271B : Penalty-Failure to file audit report within time-reasonable cause for delay–Audit report filed before assessment proceedings- Penalty is not warranted.
K. Borra Reddy v. ITO (2019) 76 ITR 78 (SN) (Hyd.)(Trib)