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.68: Cash credits – Share application money – In the absence of any falsity having been found in the documents submitted by the assessee to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share transaction, these documents could not be summarily rejected as had been done by the Assessing Officer- Deletion of addition is held to be justified .

ITO v. Dhanlaxmi Equipment P. Ltd. (2018) 63 ITR 33(SN)/193 TTJ 236 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits – cash deposited in bank – Held, opening balance was no doubted – Held, nothing to show that opening cash balance was utilized somewhere else – Held, accepted part deposit out of the said balance and only part not accepted. Held, addition not justified.

Rajinder Singh v. ACIT (2018) 63 ITR 550 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation – Conversion of agricultural land into residential plots – AO applied S. 50C – CIT(A) held that income in the nature of business income therefore, S.50C not applicable – Held, S. 45(2) not taken into consideration and therefore, matter remanded back to CIT(A). [S. 45(2)]

Ramswaroop Saudagar v. ITO (2018) 63 ITR 262 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 40A(3) :Expenses or payments not deductible – Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits – payment exceeding Rs. 20000 – payment to truck driver who generally insist payment in cash – Held, AO did not doubt genuineness of the payment – Disallowance cannot be made .

Royal Wood Industries v. Jt. CIT (2018) 62 ITR 321 (Amritsar)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure -Capital or revenue – Trade mark expenses for use allowable as revenue expenses .

GKN Driveline (India) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2018) 62 ITR 784 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S.37(1):Business expenditure – Capital or revenue – Renovation of leased office premises is revenue expenses allowable [S.31]

Genesisi Datacomp P. Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 63 ITR 699 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Discount and commission – In absence of full details, entire payment cannot be allowed – cash discount of 1% to keep the buyer in good humor allowable in the interest of justice.

Purnima Sahoo (Smt.) v. ITO (2018) 62 ITR 54 (Cuttack)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Corporate social responsibility – peripheral development expenses and community development expenses allowable.

Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. v. Jt. CIT (OSD) (2018) 62 ITR 696 (Visakha)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Accrued or contingent liability – provision towards expenditure for closure of mines being merely a statutory provision relating to operation of mine, no deduction for proportionate expenditure to the period for which mines operated allowable.

Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. v. Jt. CIT (OSD) (2018) 62 ITR 696 (Visakha)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Accrued or contingent liability – provision for post- retirement medical benefits, future encashment leave and long service award based on actuarial valuation is allowable.

Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. v. Jt. CIT (OSD) (2018) 62 ITR 696 (Visakha)(Trib.)