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. 112 : Tax on long term capital gains-Determination of tax in certain cases-Non-resident-Sale of unlisted shares-Capital gains had to be computed only by reference to provisions of section 112(1)(c)(iii), without giving effect to first and second provisos to section 48. [S. 45, 48, 112(1)(c)(iii)]
Legatum Ventures Ltd v. ACIT(IT)(2023) 223 TTJ 589 (Mum)(Trib)
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Comparable-Sale of low volume of exports cannot be considered as valid comparable-Adjustment made adopting the ALP of interest at six moths average of LIBOR plus 3. 5 % % is not sustainable.
Ambuja Cement Ltd v Addl. CIT (2023) 223 TTJ 427 (Mum)(Trib)
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-TPO accepted cost allocation on basis of average total assets and third party sales, but refused to accept allocation done on basis of head count-Addition on account of management fee is deleted. [S. 92CA]
Franke Faber India (P.) Ltd v. Dy. CIT(2023) 223 TTJ 658/ 149 taxmann. com 105(Pune)(Trib)
S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Property is purchased by an Indian enterprise from its AE and is resold as such without any value addition, it is RPM, being specific method, which would hold field in preference to TNMM-Percentage of related party transactions of expenses of selected company was more than 57 per cent of total expenses incurred by it, selected company could not be held as comparable-Comparable-Assembly activity-Engaged in multi-dimensional ranging business and also into field of constructing-production of electronic weighing scales, currency counting machine-business of manufacturing, marketing and servicing of road and rail weigh bridges-Not comparable. [S. 92CA]
Vega India Level and Pressure Measurement (P.) Ltd v. Dy. CIT(2023) 223 TTJ 242/ [2022] 145 taxmann. com 472(Pune)(Trib)
S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development-Certificate in the month of April/May 1995-started telecommunication services after 1-4-1995 and would be eligible for deduction-Interest and miscellaneous income-Allowable deduction. [S. 80IA(4)(ii), 80IA(2A)]
Dy. CIT v. Vodafone India Ltd. (2023) 222 TTJ 217 / 152 taxmann. com 660 (Mum)(Trib)
S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development-Agreement with State Government /Statutory bodies-Developing new infrastructure facilities. i. e. irrigation projects-Entitle to deduction-Interest on mandatory fixed deposit as security against bank guarantee-Eligible for deduction. [S. 80IA(4)(i)]
Infab Infrastucture (P) Ltd v. Dy. CIT(2023) 222 TTJ 421 (Ahd)(Trib)
S. 80G : Donation-Religious purpose-Registered under section 12AA-Directed to grant approval under section 80G(5) of the Act. [S. 12AA, 8OG(5) (vi))]
Santshrehtha Gnjajan Maharaj Sevabhavi Sanstha v. CIT (2023) 221 TTJ 251 (Pune)(Trib)
S. 69A : Unexplained money-Undisclosed professional receipts-40% of expenses are allowed on estimate basis-Interest income from bank addition is justified. [S. 28(i), 37(1)]
Vijay Gautam v. Asst. CIT (2023) 222 TTJ 191 / 151 Taxmann. com 485 (All)(Trib)
S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Income from undisclosed sources-Assessment-Bogus purchases-Order of CIT(A) restricting disallowance of purchases to 5 per cent of alleged bogus purchases is affirmed. [S. 143(3)]
Dy. CIT v. Hi-Tech Engineers (2023) 222 TTJ 785 (Mum)(Trib)
S. 68 : Cash credits-Sale of ancestral gold and savings-Addition is deleted-Reassessment notice is not justified. [S. 147, 148]
Dhanpat Raj Khatri v. ITO (2023) 222 TTJ 382 / 154 Taxmann. com 58 (Jodhpur)(Trib)