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. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Artists and actors -Advance paid to purchase leasehold right in auditorium was to be considered as application of income- Entitle to exemption.[ S.2(15) 11(1)(a), 11(5)]
Nadigar Sangam Charitable Trust v. ADIT (2019) 263 Taxman 648/ 179 DTR 297/ 310 CTR 483 (Mad.)(HC)
S. 10AA : Special economic zones-Reconstruction-sole proprietorship was not been shifted to firm -Only Capital received from sole proprietorship-Not a reconstruction – Entitle to exemption. [S.10AA)4)(iii)]
PCIT v. Green Fire Exports (2019)106 taxmann.com 32 / 263 Taxman 676 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Green Fire Exports (2019) 263 Taxman 675 (SC)
S. 275 : Penalty-Bar of limitation–Initiation of penalty starts from issue of show cause notice and not from date of order u/s 201(1)- Penalty order was within time and not barred by limitation. [S. 201(1), 201(IA), 271C]
Jaipur National University v. Jt. CIT (2019) 175 DTR 337/198 TTJ 457 (Jaipur) (Trib.)
S. 271D : Penalty-Accepts any loan or deposit–Sum initially advanced as loan by father to son, but later treated as gift transaction cannot be subject to S. 269SS-levy of penalty is not justified .[S. 269S]
Hareshkumar Becharbhai Patel v. Jt. CIT (2019) 69 ITR 73 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.)
S. 271C : Penalty-Failure to deduct at source-It is necessary to establish that there was contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee- Penalty levied was deleted. [S. 273B]
Jaipur National University v. Jt. CIT (2019) 175 DTR 337 (Japur.) (Trib.)
S. 147 : Reassessment–After the expiry of four years–The assessment framed by AO who had not issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act is void-ab-initio –Notice was issued by the AO who had no jurisdiction- Reassessment is held to be bad in law . [S. 2(7A), 148]
Gaurav Joshi v. ITO(2019) 174 DTR 353 / 197 TTJ 946 (Asr.) (Trib.)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Re-opening Reopening merely on the basis of information received from investigation wing without application of mind is not valid. [S. 148]
Holy Faith International Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 69 ITR 687 (Asr.)(Trib.)
S. 143(3) : Assessment–Order giving effect to revision order– Assessing Officer is bound to follow the directions provided in the order u/s. 263 by the CIT. [S. 263]
Fortune Vincom Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 69 ITR 48 (SN) (Kol.)(Trib.)