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. 32 : Depreciation-Intangible asset-Non–compete fee-The expression “or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature” used in Explanation 3 to sub-section 32(1)(ii) is wide enough to include non-compete rights – Eligible for depreciation. [S. 32(i(ii)]
PCIT v. Piramal Glass Ltd. (Bom.)(HC), www.itatonline.org
S. 28(i) : Business loss-Future and options loss-Client code modification-Repetitive client code modifications-Client code modifications are tainted with collusive action and manipulation– Loss is held to be bogus –Not allowable as business loss- Reassessment is also upheld. [S. 133(6), 147, 148]
Time Media & Entertainment LLP v. ITO (Mum.)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org
S. 260A : Appeal – High Court –Without admitting the appeal and framing any question of law and dismissing it is not in conformity with the mandatory procedure –High Court is directed to hear the appeal following the mandatory procedure. [ S.260A(2) ( C ), 260A(3) ]
Ryatar Sahakari Sakkarre Karkhane Niyamit v .ACIT ( 2019) 308 CTR 507/ 264 Taxman 77 (SC) Editorial: From the judgement, Ryatar Sahakari Sakkarre Karkhane Niyamit v .ACIT ( 2016) 383 ITR 562 /287 CTR 649/ 137 DTR 383 ( Karn) (HC)
S.254(1) : Appellate Tribunal- Duties- Ex parte order- Even if the assessee could not appear , the Tribunal could have decided the appeal on merits- The Tribunal ought to have restored the appeal on miscellaneous application filed by the assessee- Court also directed to send the copy of the Judgement to the President of the Tribunal as well as Law Secretary in the Ministry of law and Justice so that the same may be brought to the notice of all the Members of the Tribunal . [S.260A, ITATR.1963, R. 24 ]
Ritha Sabapathy (Smt) v Dy.CIT ( 2019) 416 ITR 191/308 CTR 417 / 263 Taxman 84/177 DTR 178( Mad) (HC)
Interpretation of taxing statutes-Retrospective Operation- Presumption of retrospective application of amendments of Procedural nature.
CIT v. Ram Kishan Dass. (2019) 413 ITR 337 / 307 CTR 777/ 263 Taxman 657 (SC)
S. 148 : Reassessment–Notice–Reasons for reassessment need not be given in notice-Writ is held to be not maintainable–Respondent was directed to furnish the recoded reasons from the receipt of order copy–Petitioner can file objection if any against the recorded reasons with n four weeks from the date of receipt of the reasons. [S.147, Art. 226]
Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd. v. UOI (2019) 413 ITR 370/ 179 DTR 209 / 310 CTR 648 (Mad.)(HC),Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd. v .UOI (2020) 269 Taxman 120 (Mad) (HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-Mixed question of facts and law- Writ is held to be not maintainable–Time limit for issue of Rs. 1 lakh of is applicable to S.149(1)(b) and not for S,149(1) (a) of the Act—Notice to reassessment issued within six years is not barred by limitation. [S. 148, 149(1)(a), 149(1)(b), Art. 226]
T. C. V. Engineering Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 413 ITR 319 (Mad.)(HC)