S. 36(1)(va): Any sum received from employees-Not paid before due date-Disallowance was affirmed. [S.260A]
Unitac Energy Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd v. ACIT (2025) 474 ITR 265 (Ker)(HC)S. 36(1)(va): Any sum received from employees-Not paid before due date-Disallowance was affirmed. [S.260A]
Unitac Energy Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd v. ACIT (2025) 474 ITR 265 (Ker)(HC)S. 36(1)(iv) : Contribution towards a recognized provident fund-Business expenditure-Payments made on next day since due date fell on National holiday-Deductible.[37(1), 260A]
Aero Club v. ACIT [2023] 156 taxmann.com 74 / (2025) 474 ITR 320 (Delhi)(HC)S. 17(2) : Salary-Perquisite-Stock options provided to ex employees-Stock options were not a perquisite; no exercise of options-No income chargeable to tax-Not liable to deduct tax at source. [S. 5, 17(2)(vi), 197, Art. 226]
Sanjay Baweja v. Dy. CIT (2025) 474 ITR 376 (Delhi)(HC)S. 17(2): Salary-Perquisite-Valuation of shares-Face value-Shares allotted as part of employee stock purchase scheme Lock-in period during which shares could not be transferred-Valuation of shares taking into account restrictive condition. [ S. 17(2)(iiia), 260A]
Ravi Kumar Sinha v. CIT (2025) 474 ITR 594 (Delhi)(HC)S. 12A: Registration-Trust or institution-Cancellation of registration-Treating donation as corpus and later treating as general donation and paying tax as per order of Settlement Commission under section 245C-Cancellation of registration not valid.[ S. 12AA(3), 245C, 260A ]
CIT v. Gobind Ram Goel Charitable Trust (2025) 474 ITR 568 (Cal)(HC)S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Capital or revenue receipt-Security deposits-High Court admitted appeal to decide whether Tribunal was justified in treating amount received as security deposit which was forfeited as a capital receipt. [S. 260A]
PCIT v. Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd [2023] 147 taxmann.com 163 (Bom)(HC)S.80IA: Industrial undertakings – Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development -Income tax refund – Interest on excess payment of tax – Income derived from eligible business – Eligible for deduction- No substantial question of law . [ S.260A ]
PCIT (Central)-1 v. Hiranandani Builders (Bom)(HC), www.itatonline.org Editorial : Order of Tribunal in ITO v. Hiranandani Builders ( 2017) 83 taxmann.com 65 ( Mum)( Trib) , affirmed .S.80IA: Industrial undertakings – Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development -Derived – Interest income on fixed deposits kept for contractual obligations and Interest on wrongful deduction of TDS refund – Eligible for deduction as profits derived from infrastructure facility. [ S. 56 ,80IA(ii), 254(2), 260A , Art.226 ]
Gateway Terminals India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (Bom) ( HC) www.itatonlineorgS. 69C : Unexplained expenditure – Bogus purchases -Information from sales tax department – Bogus accommodation entries – Purchases – Payments through banking channels – Sales accepted – Addition restricted to 5 percent – PCIT v. Kanak Impex (India) Ltd. [2025] 474 ITR 175 / 172 taxmann.com 283 (Bom)( HC) distinguished. [ S. 143(3) ]
ITO v. Khimchand Okchand Bhansali [2025] 174 taxmann.com 148 (SMC ) (Mum ) Trib.)S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure – Bogus purchases – Addition restricted to 4% – Tribunal held that since purchases were supported by invoices, bank statements, stock register, and no defect was found in books or sales, only profit element could be added. High Court decision in PCIT v. Kanak Impex (India) Ltd. [2025] 474 ITR 175 / 172 taxmann.com 283 (Bom)( HC) distinguished- Appeal of revenue was dismissed .
ACIT v. Dhiraj Parbat Gothi (Mum)(Trib) www.itatonline.org