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

Central Goods and Service Tax Act , 2017
GST Network: The regime is not tax friendly.

Abicor and Binzel Tecnoweld Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI( Bom)(HC) , www.itatonline.org

Service tax – Finance Act, 1994
S.65:Service-tax on maintenance of property-Under the MOFA, the builder/ developer is under a statutory obligation to look after the day-to-day upkeep, maintenance and repair of the property till conveyance to the co-op society. Such maintenance of the structure is not rendering a taxable service as per S. 65 (64) of the Finance Act, 1994

CST v. Shri. Krishna Chaitanya Enterprises(2019) 173 DTR 129 (Bom)HC) , www.itatonline.org/GST v.Green Valley Developers ( 2019) 173 DTR 129 (Bom)HC) , www.itatonline.org GST v.Kumar Beheary Rathi ( 2019) 173 DTR 129 (Bom)HC) , www.itatonline.org

Interpretation of taxing statutes — Beneficial Provision — Retrospective application.

CIT v. Manoj Kumar Singh. (2018) 402 ITR 238/ 303 CTR 294/ 167 DTR 179 (All) (HC)

Interpretation of taxing statutes — Similarity in language used in provisions.

CIT v. Swapna Enterprise (2018) 401 ITR 488 / 253 Taxman 531 /166 DTR 51/ 302 CTR 504 (Guj) (HC)

Interpretation of taxing statutes — Presumption of prospectivity of statute- Machinery provisions .

CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 445 (SC) (HC)

Interpretation – Binding precedent -. Interpretations given by High Courts and Tribunals cannot be ignored by the Assessing Officers

Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. v. CIT( 2018) 404 ITR 564/166 DTR 379 (Bom)(HC) , www.itatonline.org

Wealth –tax Act, 1957 –Finance Act 1983
S. 40(3) :Levy of wealth tax on land and building which is not used for the purpose of business was held to be valid – Parliament has legislative competence to tax land and buildings which are in List-II of the 7th Schedule and whether the classification of “companies in which the public are not substantially interested” is neither arbitrary nor violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India . [ Art 14 ]

Indian Express Newspapers(Bom) (P) Ltd. v. IAC ( 2018) 164 DTR 233/ 302 CTR 33 (Bom)(HC) , www.itatonline.org

Wealth-tax Act, 1957
S. 7:Net Wealth — Vehicle funded by and maintained on behalf of Principal foreign company was held to be not included in net Wealth of Assessee -Principle of consistency was followed .[S.2(m) ]

DIT Wealth-Tax v. Hersh W. Chadha (2018) 401 ITR 502/165 DTR 52/ 302 CTR 245 (Delhi) (HC)

Wealth-tax Act, 1957

S. 2(ea): Valuation of asset – Immoveable property – Lessee sub-leasing property for higher rent and receiving deposit- Value Of Property declared by assessee was correct fair market value as on the relevant valuation date — Amount paid by lessee was not assessable as income of assesse. [ S. 5, 7 , Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 ]

DIT Wealth-Tax v. Hersh W. Chadha (2018) 401 ITR 502/165 DTR 52/ 302 CTR 245 (Delhi) (HC)

Wealth-tax Act, 1957
S.2(ea):Assets- Remand to Assessing Officer by Tribunal on question of valuation, issue stating that the lands not includible in net wealth cannot be raised , matter remanded . [ S.24(5) ]

Lalit Suri Through Legal Representative Jyotsna Suri v. CWT (2018) 402 ITR 104 /166 DTR 84/ 305 CTR 942 (Delhi) (HC) / Jyotsna Suri v. CWT (2018) 402 ITR 104/166 DTR 84 / 305 CTR 942 (Delhi) (HC)