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. 147 : Reassessment –Issuance of notice under S. 143(2) is mandatory -Failure to issue is not procedural irregularity –S. 292BB does not dispense with the issuance of any notice that is mandated to be issued under the Act, but merely cures the defect of service of such notice if an objection in such regard is not taken before the completion of the assessment or reassessment-Entire proceedings including any order is liable to be quashed though the assessee had participated in the course of the reassessment. [S.143(2), 148, 153(2), 292BB]
CIT v. Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 132/304 CTR 988/169 DTR 179 (Cal) (HC)
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Transactional net margin method—Exclusion of functionally different comparable companies-Finding of fact-No substantial question of law. [S. 260A]
PCIT v. Barclays Technology Centre India Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 138/ 305 CTR 193 /171 DTR 58 (Bom.) (HC)
S. 45 : Capital gains–Transfer- Vendor in possession till total consideration is paid-Transfer is not complete though the agreement is registered.[S.2(47)]
PCIT v. Talwalkars Fitness Club. (2018) 409 ITR 37 (Bom)(HC)
S. 40A(3) : Expenses or payments not deductible – Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits – Where the income is computed applying the gross profit rate , no disallowances can be made by applying provisions of S.40A(3) [ S. 36, R.6DD(j) ]
CIT v. Jadau Jewellers And Manufactures (P) Ltd. (2018) 409 ITR 85 (Raj)(HC) Editorial: SLP is granted to the revenue ,CIT v. Jadau Jewellers And Manufactures (P) Ltd. ( 2016) 406 ITR 4 (St.)
S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source -Insertion of second proviso by the Finance Act , 2012 , with effect from Apri1, 2003, is declaratory and curative and applicable retrospectively with effect from 1-4-2005 — Payee offering to tax sum received in its return — No disallowance can be made.[S. 37(1), 201 (1)]
CIT v. Shivpal Singh Chaudhary. (2018) 409 ITR 87 (P&H) (HC)
S.32: Depreciation- Capital or revenue expenditure -Technical knowhow payment – Agreement providing for payment of lump-sum consideration in five instalments- held to be capital in nature -Allowing the miscellaneous application the Court held that the assessee is entitle to depreciation.[S. 37]
Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. v. CIT(2018) 409 ITR 42 /( 2019) 306 CTR 165/ 173 DTR 104/ 260 Taxman 371 (SC) Editorial : Order in Honda Siel Cars India Ltd. v. CIT( 2017 ) 395 ITR 713/ 249 taxman 1 (SC)
S. 2(14)(iii) : Capital asset-Agricultural land- Solitary instance -Adventure in the nature of trade -Business -Purchase of agricultural land and sale of the said land after few years – Not deriving any income or not making any improvement of land and intention to earn profit cannot be the sole test to treat the transaction as adventure in the nature of trade – Solitary instance of sale alone could not characterise the transactions as an adventure in the nature of trade. [S. 2 (13)]
PCIT v. John Poomkudy (2018) 409 ITR 149 /( 2019) 261 Taxman 56/ 174 DTR 370/ 307 CTR 81 (Ker) (HC)
S. 153A : Assessment – Search- No incriminating material was found at the time of search- Assessment is void in law.
ACIT v. Maruti Clean Coal & Power Ltd. (2018) 193 TTJ 1 (UO) (Raipur)(Trib.)
S. 147 : Reassessment-Reopening of assessment cannot be permitted merely on ground that there is change in view of AO and he subsequently believes that earlier view is incorrect. [S.133(6), 143(3)]
ACIT v. Ganesh J. Modi (2018) 65 ITR 30 (SN) (Mum.)(Trib.)
S. 147 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years–Reassessment notice to be seta-side where no income had escaped assessment on account of assessee’s failure to disclose true facts in the assessment. [S. 148, 153A]
ACIT v. Maruti Clean Coal & Power Ltd. (2018) 193 TTJ 1 (UO) (Raipur)(Trib.)