S. 68 : Cash credits-Capital gains-Sale of property-Part of sale consideration credited in assessee’s account–Addition as income from undisclosed source is held to be justified. [S. 45]
CIT v. Harri Joseph (2019) 415 ITR 181 (Ker.)(HC)S. 68 : Cash credits-Capital gains-Sale of property-Part of sale consideration credited in assessee’s account–Addition as income from undisclosed source is held to be justified. [S. 45]
CIT v. Harri Joseph (2019) 415 ITR 181 (Ker.)(HC)S. 68 : Cash Credits-Source of fund explained–Burden discharged -Deletion of addition is held to be justified.
CIT v. T. B. Kunhimahin Haji and others. (2019) 415 ITR 491 (Ker.)(HC)S. 55A : Capital gains-Reference to valuation officer-Cost of acquisition-Filing valuation report-Refusal to make reference to valuation officer is not proper-Matter remitted to Assessing Officer for reference to valuation officer. [S. 45]
C. V. Sunny. v. CIT (2019) 415 ITR 127/ 179 DTR 115/ 309 CTR 291/ 265 Taxman 19 (Mag.) (Ker.)(HC)S.28(i) Business income- : Capital Gains-Capital asset-Agricultural land-Purchase lands from land owners, convert them for non-agricultural use and sell them to companies-Property sold was not capital asset- Assessable as business income . [S. 2(14), 45 ]
Sunil Bansal v. ACIT (2019) 415 ITR 236/ 267 Taxman 87 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of assessee dismissed , Sunil Bansal v. CIT (2022) 287 Taxman 175/113 CCH 172 (SC)/ Review petition dismissed, Sunil Bansal v. CIT (2022) 288 Taxman 650 (SC)S. 45 : Capital gains-Capital loss-Loss incurred on account of sale of shares to sister concern-Neither fraudulent nor colourable device-Allowable as capital loss. [S. 260A]
CIT v. Parry and Co. Ltd. (2019) 415 ITR 45 (Mad.)(HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Year of allowability of expenditure-Method of accounting-Rate of tax is same in both assessment years-Question academic-No question of law. [S. 145, 260A]
PCIT v. Rajesh Prakash Timblo (2019) 415 ITR 334/ (2020) 185 DTR 34/ 313 CTR 91 (Bom.)(HC) PCIT v. Vidya Rajesh Timlo (2019) 415 ITR 334/(2020) 185 DTR 34 / 313 CTR 91 (Bom.)(HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Manufacture of yarn-Replacement of old machinery by purchase and installation of new machinery-Not allowable as revenue expenditure.
CIT v. Kongarar Spinners Ltd. (2019) 415 ITR 103 (Mad.)(HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure—Commission paid to persons who have referred the students–Disallowance of 50% of commission is held to be justified.
Malti Gupta (Smt.) v. CIT (2019) 415 ITR 168 (P&H)(HC)S. 28(i) : Business Loss-Embezzlement of cash by director- Recovery of amount or outcome of pending criminal prosecution against director before Metropolitan Magistrate is irrelevant– Allowable as deduction. [S. 36(2), 37(1)]
PCIT v. Saravana Selvarathnam Trading And Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 415 ITR 146 (Mad.)(HC)S. 28(i) : Business loss-Bank guarantee-Loss due to encashment of bank guarantee is allowable as business loss.
CIT v. Chandragiri Construction Co. (2019) 415 ITR 63 (Ker.) (HC)