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.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Recipients had offered the income ,hence no disallowance can be made . The AO was directed to verify said aspects
Vardhvinayak Township Development (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 168 ITD 456 (Mum) (Trib.)
S.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source- Advertisement on hoardings- Short deduction of tax at source applying wrong section , no disallowance can be made. [ S. 194C, 194I ]
DCIT v. Vantage Advertising P. LTD. (2018) 61 ITR 564 (Kol.) (Trib)
S.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Payment to foreign shipping companies ,S. 172 is applicable hence not liable to deduct tax at source [ S. 172 ,194C, 195 ]
DCIT v. Associated Pigments Ltd. (2018) 61 ITR 553 (Kol) (Trib)
S.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source -Retrospective operation — If the recipients had paid due taxes on the amount received from the assessee no disallowance can be made . AO was directed to verify whether the recipient has paid the taxes on amount received from the assesse [ S. 194A,194C ]
Powerware India P. Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 61 ITR 746 (Ctk) (Trib)
S.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Payment of commission to foreign agent –Not liable to deduct tax at source, hence , no disallowances can be made .[ S .5(2)(b),9(1)(i) , 195 ]
ACIT v. Manufax (India) S. B. (Agra)(Trib) , www.itatonline.org
S.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Payment being not fees for technical services ,not liable to deduct tax at source -DTAA-India –Canada [ S.9(2), Art 12 ]
CIT v. Mira Exim Ltd. (2018) 400 ITR 28 (Delhi) (HC)
S.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source-Compensation paid to joint venture –Not liable to o deduct tax at source – Disallowance was held to be not justified [ S. 194H, 194J ]
Entrepreneurs (Calcutta) Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 400 ITR 521 (Cal) (HC)
S.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source –. A party cannot be called upon to perform an impossible Act i.e. to comply with a provision not in force at the relevant time but introduced later by retrospective amendment. S. 40(a)(i) disallowance can be made only if the royalty falls under Explanation 2 to s. 9(1)(vi) but not if it falls under Explanation 6 to s. 9(1)(vi) [ S.9(1)(vi), 194C,194J, 195 ]
CIT v. NGC Networks (India)(Pvt. Ltd( 2018) 167 DTR 245 / 304 CTR 306/ (2021) 432 ITR 326 (Bom)(HC) , www.itatonline.org
S.40(a)(ia):Amount not deductible- Deduction at source-Purchase made from different group companies –Difference opinion – Matter was referred to Chief Justice for appropriate order -DTAA-India Japan –USA [ S.9(1)(i), 90, 195,Art ,24 ]
CIT v. Mitusubishi Corporation India (P.) Ltd. (2018) 252 Taxman 31 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial: Mitusubishi Corporation India (P.) Ltd. v.ACIT (2014) 62 SOT 58 (URO) / 41 taxmann.com 162 ( Delhi) (Trib)
S.40(a)(ia):Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Proviso excepting assessee from disallowance where payee has declared payment in his return and paid tax thereon has retrospectively applicable, hence no disallowance can be made .[ S. 201(1) ]
CIT v. Manoj Kumar Singh. (2018) 402 ITR 238/ 303 CTR 294/ 167 DTR 179 (All) (HC)