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.37(1): Business expenditure- Capital or revenue -Abandoned projects – State Government ordered closure of implementation of said project – Same line of existing business- Allowable as business expenditure.

Tamilnadu Magnesite Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 407 ITR 543/ 257 Taxman 79/ 171 DTR 151/ 305 CTR 269 (Mad) ( HC)

S.37(1):Business expenditure- Education expenses of director’s son- No direct nexus with the business of the company – Not allowable as deduction .

Indian Galvanics Cyrium Foils Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 257 Taxman 32 / 303 CTR 800/ 168 DTR 241 (Bom) (HC)

S. 36(1)(viii) : Eligible business – Special reserve -Artificial increase of profit by assessee by adding back amortization and depreciation in SLR investment so as to arrive higher amount of profit for claiming deduction under section 36(1)(viii) was unjustified.

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank. JCIT (2018) 256 Taxman 349 (Karn)( HC)

S. 36(1)(iii) :Interest on borrowed capital -Manufacture and sale of fruit juice and like products- Joint venture company for production of milk -Interest borrowed for setting up of joint venture is held to be allowable as deduction.

CIT v. Keventer Agro Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 437 (Cal) (HC)

S. 23: Income from house property – Annual value -Vacancy allowance -Construction business- Some flats constructed by assessee were not let out during year -Properties held as stock-in-trade were not let out for any previous years, vacancy allowance is not available-Liable to pay tax on the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year under S. 23(1)(a) of the Act. [ S. 22,23(1)(a), 23(1)(c) ]

Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. v. ACIT ( 2018) 89 Taxmann.com 238 ( Delhi) (HC) Editorial: SLP is granted to the assessee, Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 256 Taxman 294 (SC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income -Disallowance cannot be made in excess of actual exempted income-Matter remanded . [ R.8D ]

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank. v. JCIT (2018) 256 Taxman 349 (Karn)(HC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax -Capital or revenue -Power subsidy received by assessee company from State Government under Power Intensive Industries Scheme, 2005, for setting up a new industrial unit in backward area was capital receipt and, thus, not liable to tax

CIT v. Keventer Agro Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 437 (Cal) (HC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Interest on bank deposits out of share capital- Prior to commencement of business operations- Interest is liable to be assesses as income from other sources- interest income would go to reduce capital cost of project and was on capital account and same could not be taxed as income from other sources [ S.56 , 145 ]

PCIT v. Bank Note Paper Mill India (P.) Ltd. (2018) 256 Taxman 429 / ( 2019) 412 ITR 415 (Karn ) ( HC) Editorial: Order in, ITO v Bank Note Paper Mill India P.Ltd ( 2017) 56 ITR 226 (Bqng) (Trib) is affirmed .

S. 281 : Certain transfers to be void – Failure by Department to bring on record service of notice under Rule 2 — Charge registered by Sub-Registrar six and a half years after sale deed registered in favour of purchaser — Order declaring transfer null and void and notice for auction of property set aside .[ S.179(1) 220, 222 SCH II, RR. 2, 16.]

Rekhadevi Omprakash Dhariwal v. TRO (2018) 406 ITR 368/ 257 Taxman 109 / 304 CTR 430/ 168 DTR 427(Guj) (HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Writ against notice is not maintainable , except where the Commissioner lacks jurisdiction .[ Art 226 ]

Designmate India P. Ltd v. CIT ( 2018) 406 ITR 443 ( Guj) (HC)