S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Interest on amount of sundry debtors outstanding cannot be charged on accrual basis [ S. 145 ]
DCIT v. Narayani Ispat Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 61 ITR 371 (Kolk) (Trib)S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Interest on amount of sundry debtors outstanding cannot be charged on accrual basis [ S. 145 ]
DCIT v. Narayani Ispat Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 61 ITR 371 (Kolk) (Trib)S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Mutuality- Receipts by Co -operative society form its members ie. Non-occupancy charges , transfer charges common amenity fund charges and other charges , are exempt from income -tax Act based on the principle of mutuality [S. 2(24), Maharashtra Co -operative Societies Act , 1960 , S. 79A ]
ITO v. Venkatesh Premises Co -operative Society Ltd ( 2018) 402 ITR 670/ 163 DTR 465/301 CTR 514/ 254 Taxman 313 ( SC) Editorial: From the judgement of Bombay High Court in ITO v. Venkatesh Premises Co -operative Society Ltd (ITA No 680 of 2009 dt 11-1-2010) Mittal Court Premises Co -operative Society Ltd v. ITO ( 2010) 320 ITR 414 ( Bom) (HC) , and CIT v. Shree Parleshwar Co -op- Housing Society Ltd ( 2017) 10 ITR-OL 202 ( Bom) (HC) is affirmedS.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.orgS. 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)