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. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-declared income under head business or profession-No declaration of capital gains-Denial of exemption by the AO, which is up held by the CIT(A) is affirmed. [S. 28(i), 54F, 143(1)]

Rajan Arputharaj Vincent Naveen. v. ACIT (2024) 209 ITD 114 (Chennai)(Trib.)

S. 50C : Capital gains-Full value of consideration-Stamp valuation-Transfer of tenancy rights-Permanent alternate accommodation-Provisions of section 50C would not apply in case of transfer of tenancy rights. [S. 45(1)]

Girdharlal Brothers. v. Addl. CIT (2024) 209 ITD 285 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Fes for technical services-Sales commission-Not liable to deduct tax at source-DTAA-India-USA.[S. 195, Art. 12]

DCIT v. Algonomy Software (P.) Ltd. (2024) 209 ITD 564 (Bang) (Trib.)

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Commission-Export commission to non-residents agents for services rendered outside India is not liable for withholding tax and, therefore, no disallowance could be made-7 of OECD model convention. [S. 9(1)(i), 195]

DCIT v. Stylam Industries Ltd. (2024) 209 ITD 75 (Chd.)(Trib.)

S.37(1): Business expenditure-Part of bad debt-Capital expenditure-Alternative claim-Matter remanded to remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) to verify and consider said claim-Disallowance on staff welfare, marketing, conveyance, travel, and miscellaneous expenses is restricted to 10%. [S.36(2)]

Aarav Fragrances and Flavors (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 209 ITD 556 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Depreciation-Temporarily suspension of business-Dormant for some times-Eligible to claim revenue expenditure and depreciation of fixed assets. [S. 32]

DCIT v. Magnum Power Generation Ltd. (2024) 209 ITD 241 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S.37(1): Business expenditure-Percentage of completion method (POCM)-Provision for expected contract losses-Supported by scientific basis and AS-7-Allowable as deduction and no addition can be made to book profit. [S.115JB, 145]

International Seaport Dredging (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2024) 209 ITD 515 (Chennai) (Trib.)

S.37(1): Business expenditure-VAT penalty is compensatory in nature and would be allowable as deduction.

DCIT v. Stylam Industries Ltd. (2024) 209 ITD 75 (Chd.)(Trib.)

S.37(1): Business expenditure-Warranty provision-Provision is calculated based on DCF method in a scientifically sound and consistent method which complied with Accounting Standard 29 (AS-29)-Allowable as deduction.[S. 145]

Rotomag Motors And Controls (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 209 ITD 329 (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 36(1)(iii) :Interest on borrowed capital-Interest free loan-Share capital and reserves and surplus far exceeding interest-free advances-No disallowance can be made-Matter remanded.

DCIT v. Stylam Industries Ltd. (2024) 209 ITD 75 (Chd.)(Trib.)