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. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Company set up for prevention of pollution-Preservation of environment is an object of general public utility-Entitle to exemption. [S.2(15), 12A, Companies Act, S.25]

CIT v. Naroda Enviro Projects Ltd. (2019) 419 ITR 482/ (2020) 190 DTR 228/ 317 CTR 33 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 10(23C) : Educational institution-Substance over form to be considered-Matter remanded back to the Chief CIT with a direction to examine the entire financials and to take decision on merits in accordance with law. [S. 10(23C )(vi), 12, Art.226]

PKD Trust v. ITO (2019) 181 DTR 23/311 CTR 657 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India–Royalty– Payment made for use of software-Not royalty-DTAA-India-USA-United Kingdom. [S. 195, Art. 12]

GE India Industrial (P) Ltd. v. PCIT ( 2019) 267 Taxman 398/ 111 taxmann.com 165 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: SLP is granted to the revenue, PCIT v.GE India Industrial (P) Ltd ( 2019) 267 Taxman 166 (SC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India–Royalty– Payment made to supplying drawings, designs etc–Before commencement of production-Not royalty-Not liable to deduct tax at source DTAA-India-Austria. [S. 195]

Majestic Auto Ltd v CIT ( 2019) 267 Taxman 252 ( P& H) (HC) (Editorial: Order in Dy.CIT v Majestic Auto Ltd (1994) 51 ITD 313 (Chd.) (Trib.) is reversed.)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India–Royalty– Amount paid to Associated Enterprise towards embedded software– Not royalty-No substantial question of law.[S. 260A]

CIT v. Nortal Network India International Inc (2019) 267 Taxman 523 / 111 taxmann.com 224 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: SLP is granted to the revenue is allowed CIT v Nortal Network India International Inc ( 2019)267 Taxman 522 (SC).

S. 5 : Scope of total income–Accrual of Interest-Question of fact–Deletion of addition is held to be justified-No question of law. [S.4, 260A, Infrastructure Development Board Act, 2001]

CIT v. H.P. Infrastructure Development Board (2019) 267 Taxman 487 / 111 taxmann.com 326 (HP)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, CIT v. H.P. Infrastructure Development Board (2019) 267 Taxman 486 (SC)

S. 5 : Scope of total income – Accrual of Interest-Question of fact– Deletion of addition is held to be justified-No question of law. [S. 4, 260A, Infrastructure Development Board Act, 2001]

PCIT v. H.P. Infrastructure Development Board (2019) 267 Taxman 500/ 111 taxmann.com 288 (HP) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed; PCIT v. H.P. Infrastructure Development Board (2019) 267 Taxman 499 (SC)

S. 2(42A) : Short-term capital asset–Assignment of loan-Loss arising out of assignment of loan is allowable as short term capital loss. [S. 2(14), 2(42B), 28(i)]

PCIT v Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. (2019) 267 Taxman 644 (Bom.)(HC)/Editorial : SLP of Revenue dismissed , PCIT v. Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. (2022) 286 Taxman 435 (SC)

S. 45(3) : Capital gains – Transfer of capital asset to firm – AOP – BOI – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation- Deemed full value of consideration shall be considered for the purpose of computation of capital gain as per which the amount recorded in the books of account of the firm shall be taken as a full value of consideration- Provision of S.50C is not applicable- Special provision of S.45(3) override the general provision of S.50C of the Act . [ S.45 ,48, 50C ]

Amartara v DCIT ( Mum) (Trib) (UR )

S.254(2): Rectification of mistake apparent on record – Application for rectification was filed with in period of six months – Order recalling the order is beyond period of limitation is held to be valid . [ S.255(5) , ITAT R. 24 ,Art.226 ]

PCIT v. ITAT ( 2020) 425 ITR 581/ 186 DTR 342 / 271 Taxman 99/ ( 2021 ) 322 CTR 861 ( Bom) (HC) www.itatonline.org