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. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Software Development expenses-Product abandoned on becoming obsolete due to development in technology-No enduring benefit-Allowable as revenue expenditure-SLP of Revenue is dismissed.[Art. 136]

PCIT v. Adadyn Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (2024)465 ITR 409/162 taxmann.com 667 /300 Taxman 112(SC) Editorial : PCIT v. Adadyn Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (2024)465 ITR 353 /162 taxmann.com 666 (Karn)(HC)

S. 32 : Depreciation-Carry forward and set off of unabsorbed depreciation-Amendment of Section 32(2) by Finance Act, 2001-Unabsorbed depreciation or part thereof not set off till Assessment year 2002-03-Carry forward and set off permitted without limit.[S. 32(2) 260A]

PCIT v. Vishaldeep Spinning Mills Ltd [2023] 153 taxmann.com 372 / (2024) 465 ITR 524 (Guj)(HC) Editorial : SLP of Revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Vishaldeep Spinning Mills Ltd. (2024)465 ITR 530/299 Taxman 368 (SC)

S. 32 : Depreciation-Carry forward and set off of unabsorbed depreciation-Amendment of Section 32(2) by Finance Act, 2001-Unabsorbed depreciation or part thereof not set off till Assessment year 2002-03-Carry forward and set off permitted without limit-High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal-SLP of Revenue is dismissed [S. 32(2) Art. 136]

PCIT v. Vishaldeep Spinning Mills Ltd. (2024)465 ITR 530/299 Taxman 368 (SC) Editorial : PCIT v. Vishaldeep Spinning Mills Ltd [2023] 153 taxmann.com 372/ (2024) 465 ITR 524 (Guj)(HC)

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Specific purposes and objects without profit motive-Investment in Joint venture and utilisation of land allotted by Government for commercial purposes and earning profits in form of rental Income and sharing of profits-Deviation and contravention of objects, purposes and mission-Not entitled to exemption-Denial of exemption cannot be restricted only to extent of sum of investment in joint venture-Assessee is not entitled to exemption. [S.11(5), 12, 12A,13(1)(d), 80G, 260A]

National Academy of Construction v. ADIT(E) [2023] 156 taxmann.com 532/ (2024)465 ITR 69 / 340 CTR 729(Telangana) (HC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India- Royalty-
Income-Tax-Transfer of Copyright and right to copyrighted article-Customer relationship management services by resident of Singapore-Fees received not royalty-Not taxable in India [DTAA-India-Singapore [Art.12(4)(b)]

CIT(IT) v. Salesforce.Com Singapore Pte. Ltd. (2024)465 ITR 257 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Capital or revenue receipt-Subsidy received from Government-Purpose test-Sales-Tax subsidy received from State Government as incentive to set up new unit or large-scale investment in fixed capital-Capital receipt. [S. 28(i), 260A]

CIT v. Indo Rama Textiles Ltd. (2024) 465 ITR 562 / 337 CTR 159/158 taxmann.com 685 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 158BC : Block assessment – Search and seizure – Undisclosed income — Protective assessment— Altering protective assessment of assessee without any change or development in findings recorded in second block assessment order of other company — Second block assessment order in case of assessee vitiated — Assessee proved nature and source of credit entries in bank accounts of two companies sourced from another company and its subsidiaries — Tribunal order setting aside second block assessment order of assessee justified [ S. 132 , 260A ]

PCIT v. Ram Ratan Modi [2024] 464 ITR 690 (Cal)(HC)

S. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Prima facie material to indicate escapement of income from assessment — Objection of assessee considered – Order and notice is valid .[ S. 148A(b), 148A(d), 148 , Art. 226 ]

Laxmi Meena v. UOI [2024] 464 ITR 208 (Raj)(HC)

S. 143(3): Assessment – Insolvency of Assessee — Claims to Interim Resolution Professional include claims not yet adjudicated — Insolvency petition during pendency of assessment proceedings — Revenue aware of petition and its approval — No claim before Interim Resolution Professional — Order of assessment and demand is not valid . [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 , S. 31 , The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016, Art. 226 ]

Rishi Ganga Power Corporation Ltd v. ACIT [2024] 464 ITR 133 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 250 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Stay of recovery – Pendency of appeal before CIT((A) for more than four years – As on 26 -9 -2024 , 5, 80, 188 appeals are pending – Revenue is not able to resolve the appeals by classifying the Appeals as per the issues concerning , the recurring issues, covered issues, etc- The Court held that no recovery should be made from the petitioners of any outstanding dues from the petitioners whose Appeals are pending during pendency of petitions . [ S.220, 226 , Art . 226 ]

Om Vision Infraspace Private Limited v. ITO ( Guj)( HC) www.itatonline.org