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. 36(1)(iii) :Interest on borrowed capital -loan amount was used for acquiring or construction of assets that were used for earning taxable income- Interest expenditure is allowable as deduction.

PCIT v. International Biotech Park Ltd. (2018) 259 Taxman 14 (Bom) (HC)

S. 28(i) : Business income -Income from other sources- Business of development of Bio-Tech Park, construction, leasing and sale of commercial properties, earned income from sub-lease of property and assessee’s business for development of Bio-Tech Park had already commenced, sub-lease income is assessable as business income and not as income from other sources .[ S.56 ]

Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Court held that ; assessee which is in business of development of Bio-Tech Park, construction, leasing and sale of commercial properties, earned income from sub-lease of property and assessee’s business for development of Bio-Tech Park had already commenced, sub-lease income is assessable as business income and not as income from other sources . ( AY.2010-11) PCIT v. International Biotech Park Ltd. (2018) 259 Taxman 14 (Bom) (HC)

S. 226 : Collection and recovery-Attachment—A sale is a contractual transaction-For a contract to be valid, it must be made by the free consent of parties competent to contract-In rule 16(1) of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 it is expressly stated that the defaulter-assessee shall not be competent to deal with the propertyNotice ofdemand served on 5-1-2013 —Order of attachment on 21-12-2015 — Order relates back todate of notice of demand- Order of attachment is valid- Certain transfers to be void –Tax recovery Officer cannot declare transaction is null and void , it is the function of the civil court to declare a transaction null and void -The Tax Recovery Officer clearly erred in declaring the transactions to which the petitioner was a party null and void. [S. 281, Second Schedule, Rule 2, 11]

Sri Sivalaya Advances v. TRO (2018) 408 ITR 611 / 256 Taxman 246(Mad) (HC) Jegadish Auto Finance v. TRO (2018) 408 ITR 611 (Mad) (HC) Madura Auto Finance v. TRO (2018) 408 ITR 611 (Mad) (HC) Sri Sadasivam Combines v. TRO (2018) 408 ITR 611 (Mad) (HC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–False claim of depreciation-Levy of penalty is justified. [S. 32]

Magna Credit And Financial Services Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 408 ITR 621 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Comparable-Mere dissatisfaction with the findings of facts arrived at by the Tribunal is not a substantial question of law – Appeal was dismissed.[S. 260A]

PCIT v. Cypress Semiconductors Technology India Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 408 ITR 531 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 80IB(10) : Housing projects- Construction of approach road and permission for user of land for housing project – Entitle to exemption.

CIT v. Prem Kumar Sanghi (2018) 408 ITR 632 (Raj) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed CIT v. Prem Kumar Sanghi (2018) 408 ITR 8 (St.)

S. 68 : Cash credits—Share application and share premium- Identity of creditors, creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions established—Addition cannot be made.

PCIT v. Chain House International (P.)Ltd. (2018) 408 ITR 561/( 2019) 307 CTR 19/ 174 DTR 97 (MP) (HC) PCIT v. Rohtak Chain Co (P) Ltd (2018) 408 ITR 561 /( 2019) 307 CTR 19/174 DTR 97(MP) (HC) PCIT v. Bhrat Securities Ltd (2018) 408 ITR 561/( 2019) 307 CTR 19/174 DTR 97 (MP) (HC).Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed ; PCIT v Rohtak Chain Co .( P) Ltd ( 2019) 266 Taxman 459 (SC)

S. 32 : Depreciation –Charitable Trust-Entitle to depreciation. [S.11 ]

CIT v. Shushrutha Educational Trust. (2018) 408 ITR 536 (Karn.) (HC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes– Application of income- Adjustment of excess expenditure against income of current year amounts to application of income[ S.12]

CIT v. Shushrutha Educational Trust. (2018) 408 ITR 536 (Karn) (HC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes–Institution imparting education in Banking is entitle to exemption- Grant or refusal to grant exemption under S. 10(22) or 10 (23C) is not relevant .[ S. 2(15), 10 (22),10 (23C), 12A ]

CIT v. Indian Institute Of Banking And Finance. (2018) 408 ITR 558/ 303 CTR 750 / 166 DTR 253(Bom) (HC) Editorial: Order in Indian Institute of Banking and Finance v. DDIT(E) (2015) 39 ITR 323 (Mum.)(Trib.) is affirmed.