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. 45 : Capital gains-Share of sale consideration of agricultural land-Relinquishment of shares–Family arrangement-Matter remanded to verification of shares of each members and decide accordance with law.

Sushila Devi Meena v. ITO ( 2018) 194 TTJ 68 (UO) (Jaipur) (Trib.)

S. 44BB : Mineral oils–Computation-Non-residents-The activity of hiring Ships by the user for transporting men/machines to locations where it was doing exploration/production of mineral oil is directly and closely related with ‘services ‘rendered by plant and machinery and the income arising out of such activities has to be assessed u/s. section 44BB and not u/s. 44B of the Act- Amount of service tax being in nature of statutory payment could not be included in gross receipts for the purpose of computing presumptive income of assessee u/s. 44BB. [S. 44B]

Swiwar Offshore Pte. Ltd. v. Add. CIT(IT) (2018) 167 DTR 341/ 193 TTJ 951 (Mum.) (Trib.)

S. 44AD : Civil construction–Computation–Even while passing order u/s 144 the AO cannot go beyond the provision-Addition on account of interest and VAT payable is held to be not valid. [S. 144, 154]

Simranpal Singh v. ITO (2018) 167 DTR 337 / 194 TTJ 380 (Chd.) (Trib.)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source–Payment of Honorarium to directors-Company director is different from director of Co operative Society–Not liable to deduct tax at source- Recipient has offered the honorarium as income-No disallowance can be made .[ S. 2(7), 2(19), 192, 194J(1)(ba), 201]

Sai Datta Mutual Aided Co-Operative Credit Society v. ACIT ( 2018) 169 DTR 65/ 194 TTJ 970 (Hyd.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure—Purchase cost of programs and film rights—Amortisation of inventories–Consistent method of accounting–AO is not justified in treating programs and film rights as intangible assets and allowing deprecation @ 25%. [S. 32(2)(ii)]

ACIT v. Zee Media Corporation Ltd ( 2018) 193 TTJ 36 (UO) (Mum.) (Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Commission expenses– Documentary evidences to prove genuineness of commission transaction was produced–Statement recorded cannot be used against the asseessee without giving an opportunity of cross examination. [S. 131]

Shree Bishandas Iron v. DCIT (2018) 162 DTR 209 / 191 TTJ 624 (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Income arising from rendering of advisory services in a foreign country cannot be taxed as fees for technical service where the assesse does not have a permanent establishment in India- Reimbursement cannot be asseees as income – DTAA-India- USA. [S. 92, Art, 7, 12]

Add. CIT (I) v. Timken Company (2018) 192 TTJ 823 (Kol.)(Trib.)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India–Royalty- Purchase of software does not fall in realm of ‘royalty’-No liability to withhold tax-Cannot be held to be in default-DTAA-India–USA-Singapore–Germany. [S. 90(2), 194, 195, 201(1), 201(IA)].

Tata Technologies Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (IT)(2018) 193 TTJ 833 (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 2(9) : Benami transaction–Burden of proof-Property was purchased out of loan proceeds -Burden of proof on revenue-Appeal of revenue was dismissed. [S. 24(3)]

Akashdeep Iniatiing Officer v. Manpreet Estate LLP (AT PBPT Act), www.itatonline.org

S. 4 : Dharmada cannot be considered as trading receipts and was not part of the assessable value-No duty was payable on the component of Dharmada. [S. 5, 11AA, 173Q]

D. J. Malpani v. CCE (LB) ( 2019 ) 176 DTR 305/308 CTR 73(SC), www.itatonline.org