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. 153A : Assessment – Search- Set -off of brought forward loss- No incriminating material was found in course of search relating to those expenses, claim raised by assessee was to be allowed. [ S.132 ]
HBN Dairies & Allied Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 172 ITD 43 / 170 DTR 273/ 195 TTJ 969 ( TM ) (Delhi) (Trib.)
S. 124 : Jurisdiction of Assessing Officer – Reassessment – Survey-Notice was issued by Joint Commissioner – Objection was not raised within time provided under section 124(3)(b) from date of issuance of said notice, jurisdiction of Joint Commissioner stood confirmed- Since Assessing Officer had completed reassessment with presumption that assessee did not have registration under section 12AA, however, fact remained that assessee was granted registration under section 12AA, issue in assessment orders was to be re-adjudicated afresh after considering registration granted to assessee under section 12AA .[ S.12AA, 120 , 148 ]
Karandhai Tamil Sangam v. JCIT (2018) 172 ITD 272 (Chennai) (Trib.)
S. 115JAA : Book profit – Deemed income – Tax credit – Amount of MAT tax credit available from earlier year, inclusive of surcharge and education cess etc., should be reduced from amount of tax determined on total income of current year after adding surcharge and education cess, etc. [ S. 234B, 234C ]
Consolidated Securities Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 172 ITD 163 (Delhi) (Trib.)
S.115BBE: Tax on income referred in section 69-Survey -Surrender of excess stock – Prevailing price of gold had fallen as on 31-3-2013- Unexplained investments – Loss is allowed to be set off against income disclosed in the course of survey -Provision is applicable with effect from 1-4-2017 which h is prospective and not prior to that -Remanded for verification whether entire excess stock found in the course of survey remained unsold as on 31-03 -2103 .[ S. 69 , 133A ]
ACIT v. Satish Kumar Agarwal. (2018) 172 ITD 143 (Jaipur) (Trib.)
S. 72 : Carry forward and set off of business losses -Business loss incurred in earlier year could not be set off against income under head income from other sources during relevant year- However, current year’s operational expenditure is to be allowed as set-off as per the provisions of the Act . [ S. 37(1), 56, 70, 71 ]
GVK Airport Developers Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 172 ITD 109/195 TTJ 246 / 66 ITR 9 ( SN) / 169 DTR 209 (Hyd) (Trib.)
S.68: Cash credits- Sale of furniture -Cost was very less- Amount shown more for sale of furniture to evade stamp duty- Parties admitted that exchange of some furniture was involved but cost involved was much lesser than amount shown by assessee – Excess amount shown on sale of furniture is held to be assessable as cash credits .[ S. 2(14)(ii),45 , 54, 131 ]
Devinder Kumar. v. ITO (2018) 172 ITD 103 (Delhi) (Trib.)
S. 54B : Capital gains – Land used for agricultural purposes – Capital gain utilized towards purchase of new asset before furnishing of return of income belatedly under section 139(4) would be entitle to deduction . [ S. 45, 139(4) ]
Manilal Dasbhai Makwana v. ITO (2018) 172 ITD 1 (Ahd) (Trib.)
S. 57 : Income from other sources – Deductions – Interest from fixed deposits – D-mat charges, legal expenses and medical relief expenses – Not allowable as deduction as the expenditure is not incurred for earing interest from fixed deposit .[ S.56 , 57(iii)]
Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Trust v. ITO (2018) 172 ITD 78 / 172 DTR 140/ 196 TTJ 706 (Mum) (Trib.)
S. 48 : Capital gains – Computation – Indexation -Asset acquired under a gift, indexed cost of acquisition of such capital asset has to be computed with reference to year in which previous owner first held asset. [ S.45 ]
ITO v. Nita Narendra Mulani. (Smt.) (2018) 172 ITD 169 (Mum) (Trib.)
S. 48 : Capital gains – Computation – Short term capital gain- Performance linked fees and portfolio management fees paid to portfolio manager is not allowable as deduction .[ S.45 ]
ACIT v. Apurva Mahesh Shah. (2018) 172 ITD 127 (Mum) (Trib.)