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–Pro-rata adjustment considering only associated enterprises-Matter remanded-No question of law. [S. 260A]

PCIT v. Bunge India (P.) Ltd. (2019) 265 Taxman 207 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing–Arm’s length price–Know-how–Royalty-TPO is not justified in making the addition without applying any specified method.

CIT v. SI Group-India Ltd. (2019) 265 Taxman 204/ ( 2020) 186 DTR 184 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 80IB(10) : Housing projects-Residential plus commercial-Commercial user is permitted by local authority was within local limits-Entitle to exemption.

CIT v. Indo Continental Hotels and Resorts Ltd. (2019) 107 taxmann.com 161 /264 Taxman 294 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed, CIT v. Indo Continental Hotels and Resorts Ltd. (2019) 264 Taxman 293 (SC)

S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Manufacture-Activity of compression of natural gas into CNG amounted to manufacture-Entitle to exemption. [S. 2(29BA)]

Central U.P. Gas Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2019) 106 taxmann.com 370 / 264 Taxman 283 (All.)(HC) Editorial : SLP is granted to the revenue CIT v. Central U.P. Gas Ltd. (2019) 264 Taxman 282 (SC)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure–Bogus purchases-Alleged use of five credit cards by friends–In response to summons the friends refused use of cards–Addition is held to be justified. [S. 131]

Sunil Balasubramaniam Shankar v. ITO (2019) 265 Taxman 7 (Mag.) (Mad.)(HC)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure–Bogus purchases-Tribunal is justified in restricting addition on account of alleged bogus purchases to 25 per cent.

PCIT v. Synbiotics Ltd. (2019) 265 Taxman 34 (Mag.) (Guj.)(HC)

S. 69B : Amounts of investments not fully disclosed in books of account–Addition cannot be made merely on the basis of stamp valuation adopted by Stamp authority. [S. 45, 50C]

PCIT v. Dharmaja Infrastructure (2019) 265 Taxman 125 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 69A : Unexplained money–Purchase and sale of gold on behalf of other parties-Identity of purchasers was not established– Addition on estimate basis of 3.5% of turnover is held to be justified as against 1% disclosed by the appellant.

H. Abuthahir v. DCIT (2019) 265 Taxman 9 (Mag.) (Mad.)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits–Share application money-Income tax returns, balance sheet, confirmations were produced-Deletion of addition is held to be justified. [S. 131]

PCIT v. Adamine Construction (P.) Ltd. (2019) 107 taxmann.com 84 / 264 Taxman 280 (Delhi) (HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Adamine Construction (P.) Ltd. (2019) 264 Taxman 279 (SC)

S. 56 : Income from other sources–Issue of shares at premium-Fair market value of shares-AO has to undertake exercise of determining fair market value of shares-Matter remanded. [S. 56 (2)(viib), 119]

CIT v. Vaani Estates (P.) Ltd. (2019) 264 Taxman 310//310 CTR 12 / 180 DTR 90 / 264 Taxman 310 / (2020) 429 ITR 64 (Mad.)(HC)