S. 45 : Capital gains-Business income-Merger investments in mutual funds–Liable to be assessed as capital gains and not as business income. [S. 28(i)]
S C Johnson Products (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 175 ITD 477 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 45 : Capital gains-Business income-Merger investments in mutual funds–Liable to be assessed as capital gains and not as business income. [S. 28(i)]
S C Johnson Products (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 175 ITD 477 (Delhi)(Trib.)S. 43(5) : Speculative transaction–Hedging contracts with bank– Loss on fluctuation in foreign currency–Interest was paid on fixed rate of 1.7 percent on loan amount–Not speculative in nature eligible as deduction–Interest is held to be allowable–Premium is held to be allowable on proportionate basis. [S. 36(1)(iii), 37(1), 40(a)(ia), 195]
SC Johnson Products (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 175 ITD 477 (Delhi) (Trib.)S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Pendency of appeal–Registration was granted–Corpus donation-Matter remanded to AO. [S. 12A, 12AA]
Goregaon Mahila Mandal v. ITO (2019) 175 ITD 444 (Mum.)(Trib.)S. 17 : Perquisite – Salaries -Shares were not allotted by company to assessee in his capacity of being an employee -No benefit was received by assessee – Addition cannot be made as perquisites .[ S.15.17(2), 56(2) (vii) ]
ACIT v. Subhodh Menon. (2019) 175 ITD 449/175 ITD 449 / 198 TTJ 79(Mum) (Trib.) www.itatonline.org. ACIT v. P.N.Ramaswamy (2019) 175 ITD 449/175 ITD 449 (Mum) (Trib.) www.itatonline.orgS. 254 (1) : Appellate Tribunal–Power-Ex prate order-Tribunal has statutory power to recall its order if it is satisfied that respondent has failed to appear before it for sufficient cause at time of hearing and to restore appeal.[ITAT R. 25]
Dr. Gopal Dass Agarwal v. CIT (2019) 261 Taxman 158 (All.)(HC)S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal–Duties-Delay in filing of appeal- Rejection of appeal is held to be not justified-Delay was condoned and directed the Tribunal to decide o merits. [S.10(23C(vi), 253 ]
E-Governance Society v. CIT (E) (2019) 261 Taxman 289 / 179 DTR 261/ 309 CTR 429 (HP)(HC)S. 245D : Settlement commission-where Commission had taken note of each of objections raised by Commissioner in his report and after testing same against disclosure of income made by assessee in his application, proceeded to dispose of matter by impugned order, there being no perversity in order passed by Commission, petition was to be dismissed. [S.245C, 245D(4)]
ACIT v. ITSC/UOI (2019) 419 ITR 419/ 261 Taxman 72/ 179 DTR 152 / 309 CTR 307 (Patna)(HC) /Tirupati Homes Ltd v.ITSC ((2019)419 ITR 410/ 261 Taxman 72 / 179 DTR 152 / 309 CTR 307 (Patna)(HC)S. 245C : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases–Clubbing of shareholding held by different shareholders to make collective shareholding of 20 per cent is not permissible under law–Rejection of application is held to be justified. [ S. 132 ]
Bhatia Colonizers (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 417 ITR 143/ 261 Taxman 115/ 309 CTR 240 / 179 DTR 249(Raj.)(HC)S. 226 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default-Stay-Rejection of stay application by a single line order stating petition rejected – Order set aside and directed the tax authorities to pass speaking order. [S. 220]
Archit Khemka v. PCIT (2019) 261 Taxman 108 (Mad.)(HC)S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Deduction at source-Interest other than interest on securities–Merger-Order of Commissioner (Appeals) stood merged with order of Tribunal, and further with subsequent orders of High Court and Supreme Court; hence, there did not remain or survive any jurisdiction with Commissioner to seek any rectification or correction in his earlier order–Rectification order was quashed. [S.194A, 201(1), 201(IA), 250]
Canara Bank v. CIT (A) (2019) 261 Taxman 204 / 180 DTR 106/ 310 CTR 126(All.)(HC)