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. 92A : Transfer pricing – Associated enterprises -Supplier of assessee is not manufacturer — Assessee and supplier Partnership is not controlled by individuals — Neither of Firms holding 10 Per Cent. interest in each other- Not associated enterprises .[ S.92C ]

CIT v. Veer Gems. (2018) 407 ITR 639 (Guj) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed ; CIT v. Veer Gems. (2018) 406 ITR 37 ( St)

S. 80HH :Newly established industrial undertakings – Back ward areas –Processing of cashew nuts in own factory and Industrial undertaking of sister concerns in backward areas —Entitle to deduction .

CIT v. R. Prakash, Dhanya Foods. (2018) 405 ITR 261/ 304 CTR 333/ 167 DTR 229 (Ker) (HC)

S.68:Cash credits — Share capital — Genuineness of investors in shares were not satisfactorily explained — Order of Tribunal is affirmed .[ S.260A ]

Gopal Iron And Steel Co. (Guj) Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 407 ITR 533 (Guj) (HC) Editorial: SLP is granted to the assessee; Gopal Iron And Steel Co. (Guj) Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 402 ITR 29 ( St)

S.68 : Cash credits – Interest- Deletion of addition is held to be justified – Provision for forward contract -Question of fact [ S. 37(1) ,260A.]

CIT v. Veer Gems. (2018) 407 ITR 639 (Guj) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed ; CIT v. Veer Gems. (2018) 406 ITR 37 ( St)

S. 68 : Cash credits -Loan – Produced details like copies of permanent account number cards, returns, balance-sheets with all the annexure and bank accounts before the Assessing Officer, that two of the creditors not only appeared before the Assessing Officer, but had also admitted giving loan and that there was nothing suspicious or doubtful in the version of those persons -Deletion of addition was held to be justified – Transportation charges – tax deducted at source, payments through account payee cheques, proper addresses and confirmation of account with permanent account numbers and gross receipts from the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai on account of supply of vehicles in the financial year- Merely because the parties were not physically present before the Assessing Officer, such an addition could not have been made – Deletion of addition was held to be justified . [ S.133(6), 260A ]

CIT v. Haresh D. Mehta. (2018) 407 ITR 492 (Bom) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed ; CIT v. Haresh D. Mehta ( 2018) 406 ITR 494 ( SC)

S. 45 : Capital gains – Dissolution of firm -Land was introduced as capital in one of the partner –Revaluation – Land was sold before dissolution- Capital gains is assessable in the hands of firm . [ S.45(4) ]

Ahammedkutty v. ITO (2018) 405 ITR 239 (Ker)( HC)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax – Remission or cessation of trading liability -Amounts remaining unrecoverable as creditors untraceable cannot be the ground to conclude that there was cessation of liability .

CIT v. Vishal Transformers And Switchgears Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 405 ITR 266 (All) (HC)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax – Remission or cessation of trading liability – The mere fact that the assessee has made an entry of transfer in his accounts unilaterally will not enable the Department to say that section 41 would apply and the amount should be included in the total income of the assessee- Deletion of addition was held to be justified .

CIT v. Kanoria Sugar And General Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (2018) 407 ITR 737 (Raj) (HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed; CIT v. Kanoria Sugar And General Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (2018) 405 ITR 1 ( St)

S.37(1):Business expenditure — Amount spent on construction of houses for poor in Centenary Year — Expenditure not for purposes of business hence not allowable as deduction .

CIT v. Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. (2018) 405 ITR 249/171 DTR 254 (Ker) (HC)

S.37(1): Business expenditure — Capital or revenue – Payment of non-Compete fees for retention of expertise — Expenditure incurred on account of non-compete fees is held to be revenue expenditure.

Hatsun Agro Products Ltd. v. JCIT (2018) 407 ITR 674 (Mad) (HC) , Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed as withdrawn due to low tax effect ,Hatsun Agro Products Ltd.JCIT v. Hatsun Agro Products Ltd.( 2020 ) 269 Taxman 462 ( SC)