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. 45: Capital gains- Business income- Sale of land in small plots as required by end users is assessable as capital gains. [ S. 28(i)]

ACIT v.Narendra J.Bhimani ( 2018) 169 ITD 245 (Rajkot) (Trib.)

S. 43(5) : Speculative transaction – Currency derivatives -Transactions through a recognised stock broker on recognised stock exchange , could not be termed as speculative transaction . [ S.73 ]

Nand Nandan Agrawal v. DCIT (2018) 169 ITD 161 (Agra) (Trib.)

S. 54F : Capital gains – Investment in a residential house –Sale is not concluded or agreement of sale is not certain to be honoured, assessee cannot claim deduction in respect of purchase or construction of property [ S.45, 54F(4)]

Mahesh Malneedi. v. ITO (2018) 169 ITD 154 (Hyd) (Trib.)

S. 69 :Unexplained investments – On money -No addition can be made on the basis of the documents found from premises of third party neither the name of assessee was mentioned nor any evidence was found for purchase of any property [ S. 132, 153A ]

Regency Mahavir Properties v. ACIT (2018) 169 ITD 35/64 ITR 628 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 153A : Assessment – Search-When there was no search proceedings against the assessee , assessment made in consequence of notice issued under section 153A, is invalid and void ab initio . [ S. 69,132 ]

Regency Mahavir Properties v. ACIT (2018) 169 ITD 35 / 64 ITR 628(Mum) (Trib.)

S. 153C : Assessment – Income of any other person – Search – Illegal payments -Addition made on the basis of third party statement who have retracted and without giving an opportunity of cross examination initiation of proceedings was held to be not valid [S.132 ]

Mohan Meakin Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 168 ITD 99 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -Scientific research – Revision was held to be justified and the direction given by the CIT was modified allowing the AO to examine the claim [ S. 35(1)]

Dismissing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that , claim for deduction under S. 35(1) could not be allowed where it did not maintain separate books of account in respect of its research and development activity, however the direction given by the CIT was modified allowing the AO to examine the claim .( AY. 2009-10) Nivo Controls (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 169 ITD 139 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal- Additional ground- Failure to deduct tax at source- Issue which was not contested before the CIT(A) , it is open to the assessee to challenge the disallowance first time before the Tribunal, additional ground was admitted and matter was remanded to the file of AO for adjudication on merits. [ S. 40(a)(ia), 44AB,194A,194I, Art. 265 ]

Allahabad Bank v. DCIT ( 2018) 169 ITD 189 ( Kol) ( Trib)

S.92C:Transfer pricing –Arm’s length price – Variation in closing stock in order to compute operating cost was not considered hence adjustment was held to be not valid .

PCIT v. Rahman Exports (P.) Ltd. (2018) 169 ITD 10 (All)( Trib)

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure -Seized papers- Merely on the basis of seized papers addition cannot be made when the assessee has not purchased any land from persons mentioned in the seized documents [ S. 132 ]

Saamag Developers (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 168 ITD 649 (Delhi) (Trib.)