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 – Fees for professional or technical services – third party administrator for insurance companies – Payment through assessee- Not liable to deduct tax at source- No disallowances can be made [ S. 194J, 260A ]
CIT v. Dedicated Healthcare Services (TPA ) India Pvt. Ltd. (2018] 408 ITR 36/ 259 Taxman 192 / 304 CTR 937/ 170 DTR 345(Bom) (HC)
S.37(1):Business expenditure — Marketing expenses -Multi-Speciality Hospital — Gifts to doctors – Matter Remitted To Assessing Officer for verification to find out whether for canvasing for patients .
CIT v. Vasantha Subramanian Hospitals Pvt. Ltd (2018) 408 ITR 176/ 258 Taxman 396/ 172 DTR 423/( 2019) 307 CTR 569 (Mad) (HC)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure -Expenditure on acquisition of distribution rights of feature films —Film must be commercially exploited and income received and credited in books — Feature films never exhibited and no amount credited in profit and loss account —Deduction is not allowable .[ R9B ]
Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 408 ITR 125 (Ker) (HC)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure -Provision for warranty which is made on scientific basis is deductible. [ S.145 ]
CIT v. Acer India Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 408 ITR 24 (Karn) (HC)
S. 36(1)(iii) :Interest on borrowed capital – Advances made to sister concerns from own funds – No disallowances can be made .[ S.37(1) ]
CIT v. Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. (2018) 408 ITR 184 / 259 Taxman 97(Delhi) (HC)
S.32: Depreciation — Rate of depreciation —All equipment formed part of Life Saving Equipment —Denial of depreciation on computer is held to be not proper [ ITRules 1962, Appex. I, Part A Iii 3(Xia)(D).]
CIT v. Vasantha Subramanian Hospitals Pvt. Ltd (2018) 408 ITR 176 /258 Taxman 396/ 172 DTR 423/ ( 2019) 307 CTR 569(Mad) (HC)
S.28(i):Business income — Capital gains — Conversion of agricultural land into residential plots and sale of residential plots -Consideration over fair market value to be assessed as business income -No question of law .[ S.4, 45 , 260A ]
Mahaveer Yadav v. ITO (2018) 408 ITR 19 (Raj) (HC)
S. 10 (23C): Educational institution-Exemption cannot be denied only on the ground that institution has earned surplus when the institution is solely for educational purposes .
J. B. Memorial Manas Academy Management Society. v. CIT (2018) 408 ITR 255/ 259 Taxman 537 (Uttarakhand) (HC)
Interpretation – Binding precedent -Appellate Tribunal- Assessing Officer is bound by decision of Tribunal- Pendency of an appeal would not amount to an order of stay .[ S.254(1) ]
LIC Employees Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 408 ITR 287/ 254 Taxman 119 (Mad) (HC)