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.92C: Transfer pricing- Any inclusion or exclusion of comparables per se cannot be treated as a question of law unless it is demonstrated that the Tribunal has taken in to irrelevant consideration .[ S.260A]

PCIT v. WSP Consultants India (P.) Ltd. (2018) 253 Taxman 58 (Delhi) (HC)

S.92C: Transfer pricing- Broad threshold figure of 25 per cent RPT in case of comparables is essential- Brand does play its own role in price or cost determination and, they would not be comparable to each other

PCIT v. Oracle (OFSS) BPO Services (P.) Ltd. (2018) 253 Taxman 498/ 166 DTR 358 / 303 CTR 284/ (2019) 416 ITR 54 (Delhi) (HC)

CIT v. Dilip Singh. (2018) 253 Taxman 41 / 300 CTR 184 /161 DTR 97 (Cal)(HC)

S. 92B : Transfer pricing – International transaction- Royalty arising out of use of brand name had to be treated as an international transaction.[ S.92C ]

Dabur India Ltd. v. PCIT (2018) 253 Taxman 129 / 301 CTR 367/162 DTR 297 (Delhi)

S. 69B : Amounts of investments not fully disclosed in books of account –Receipts of jewellery in the name of assessee which was found in the course of search was from the disclosed income of the wife accordingly deletion of addition was held to be justified [ S.132B, 158B, 292C ]

CIT v. Dilip Singh. (2018) 405 ITR 399/253 Taxman 41 / 300 CTR 184 /161 DTR 97 (Cal)(HC)

S.68: Cash credits- Firm -Partner- Capital introduced by the partner was duly reflected in in the books of account maintained by him , addition cannot be made in the assessment of the firm .

PCIT v. Vaishnodevi Refoils & Solvex (2018) 253 Taxman 135 (Guj) (HC)

S. 54F : Capital gains – Investment in a residential house -Relief is available if unutilized sale consideration in capital gain account scheme within due date of filing belated tax return under S. 139(4) [ S.45 , 54B ]

PCIT v. Shankar Lal Saini. (2018) 253 Taxman 308/ 168 DTR 226 (Raj)(HC)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax – Remission or cessation of trading liability – Share application money from holding company which was adjusted against goods sold by assessee cannot be assessed as cessation or remission of liability .

CIT v. Indo Widecom International Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 144/ 253 Taxman 117 / 300 CTR 437 /161 DTR 345 (All)(HC)

S. 40A(7) : Expenses or payments not deductible – Gratuity -Delay in granting approval- As the condition was satisfied, no disallowances can be made .

PCIT v. English Indian Clays Ltd. (2018) 253 Taxman 208 (Ker)(HC)

Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme -Finance Act 1988

S.88: Declaration and prescribed rates of amounts payable -No tax arrears on the date of filing of declaration – Arrears was adjusted without giving an notice of hearing -Rejection of application was held to be valid .[S.87 ]

Kapurchand Jethaji & Co. v. CIT (2018) 164 DTR 98 (Bom) (HC)

Gift -tax Act , 1958.
S. 4: Deemed gift- Investment company- Sale of shares at Rs 10 per share as against book value of shares at Rs 6.86 per share cannot be held to be in adequate- Valuation as per Schedule III of the Wealth -tax Act, 1957 cannot be applied . Addition was deleted.

Amita Dua v. GTO (2018) 164 DTR 142 / 310 CTR 269(Delhi)( HC)