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.2(14)(iii) : Capital asset – Agricultural land -Capital gains- Business income- Sale of agricultural land purchased on good price and purchasing the land of higher volumes at different places cannot be regarded as trader- Entitle to exemption. [ S. 2(14) , 28(i)]
Shailesh Gangaram Ramani. v. ITO (2018) 168 ITD 446 (Rajkot) (Trib.)
S. 2(22)(e) Deemed dividend-Beneficial owner – Prima facie, CIT v. Ankitech pvt Ltd ( 2012) 340 ITR 14 ( Delhi)( HC) and CIT v. Madhur Housing and development company ( 2018) 401 ITR 152 (SC) , is wrongly decided and should be reconsidered by larger bench.
National Travel Service v. CIT ( 2018) 401 ITR 154 / 162 DTR 201 / 300 CTR 582 / 253 Taxman 243 (SC) CIT v. Mahavir Inductomelt ( P) Ltd ( 2018) 401 ITR 154/ 162 DTR 201/ 300 CTR 582 (SC)
S. 2(22)(e):Deemed dividend -loans from two companies addition cannot be made as deemed dividend [ S. 260A ]
CIT v. Gladder Ceramics Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 205 (Guj) (HC)
S. 4 Income Chargeable to charge to tax-Panama Papers-PIL was Dismissed
Manohar Lal Sharma v. CBI ( 2018) 252 Taxman 22 (SC)
S.40(a)(i):Amounts not deductible deduction at source- Payments made by assessee not in nature of royalty either under domestic law or under DTAA–No disallowance can be made. [S.195]
CIT v. Geo Connect Ltd. (2017) 54 ITR 481 (Delhi)(Trib.)
S. 28(i) : Business loss-Chit fund business-If a subscriber incurs loss in subscribing to chit fund to raise funds to use them in his business or for business purpose, such a loss is an allowable deduction.
Kamal Raheja v. ITO (2017) 162 ITD 55 / 183 TTJ 538 / 145 DTR 225 (SMC)(Luck)(Trib.)
S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Fees paid with respect to a ‘contract of work’ does not constitute “fees for technical services” and consequently the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS.[S. 195, 201]
ITO v. Emami Paper Mills Ltd. (Kol.)(Trib.); www.itatonline.org
S. 4: Charge of income-tax–Capital or revenue-Non-compete fees-Receipt of non-compete fees is capital receipt and not assessable as capital gains.[S. 28(iv), 45, 55(2)]
CIT v. Anjum G. Balakhia (2017) 393 ITR 320 (Guj)( HC)
S. 4: Charge of income–tax -Capital or revenue- Subvention received by assessee from parent company at time when assessee making losses, payment to protect capital investment was held to be not revenue receipt. [S.2(24), 28(i)]
Siemens Pub. Communication Network Ltd v. CIT (2017) 390 ITR 1 / 291 CTR 22/ 244 Taxman 188 (SC)
S.2(14)(iii): Capital asset-Agricultural land-Sale of agricultural land to non –agriculturist cannot be the ground to deny the exemption- Capital gains cannot be chargeable to tax.[S. 45, Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue Code, 1968 , S. 2(1), 105]
Shankar Dalal & Ors v. CIT ( 2017) 294 CTR 107 / 150 DTR 197 (Bom.) (HC)