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. 28(i) : Business income-Interest on securities-Business income-Business expenditure-Salaries and perquisites-Disallowance is to be restricted to expenditure apportioned under profits and gains of business or profession and not under head interest on securities. [S. 18, 20(1(i), 36, 37(1), 40A(5),44C, Art. 136]

CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (NO. 3) (2024)469 ITR 403 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Citi Bank N. A ITR No. 191 of 1997 dt. 10-4-2003(Bom)(HC) CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (No. 4) (2024)469 ITR 410 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Citi Bank N. A (ITR No. 349 of 1995 dt. 5-3 2003 (Bom)(HC) CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (No. 5) (2024)469 ITR 414 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (ITA.No. 426 of 1998 dt. 10-4-2003 CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (No. 6) (2024)469 ITR 416 (SC) Editorial : CIT v.Citi Bank N. A (ITA No. 1 of 1988 dt. 5-3-2003, ITR No. 232 of 1996 dt. 22-7-2003) CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (No. 7) (2024)469 ITR 417 (SC) Editorial: CIT v. Citi Bank N. A (ITR.No. 265 of 1997 dt. 10-4-2003) CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (No. 7) (2024)469 ITR 417 (SC) Editorial: CIT v. Citi Bank N. A (ITR.No. 265 of 1997 dt. 10-4-2003)

S. 28(i) : Business income-Interest on securities-Business income-Business expenditure-Salaries and perquisites-Disallowance is to be restricted to expenditure apportioned under profits and gains of business or profession and not under head interest on securities-Precedent-Appeal of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 18, 20(1(i), 36, 37(1), 40A(5), Art. 136]

CIT v Citi Bank N. A. (No. 2) (2024)469 ITR 398 (SC) Editorial : Citi Bank N.A. v.CIT (2003) 262 ITR 47 (Bom)(HC)

S. 28(i) : Business income-Accrual of income-Banks-Interest on doubtful loans-Determined in accordance with Central Board of Direct Taxes Circular. [S. 21, 40A(5), 119]

CIT v. Bank of America (2024)469 ITR 406 (SC) Editorial: Decision of Bombay High Court in CIT v. Bank of America (Bom)(HC)(ITR No. 81 of 1994 dt. 22-7-2023, Followed, CITv. Citi Bank N.A. (No. 2 (2024) 469 ITR 398 (SC)

S. 28(i) : Business income-Income from house property-Object of developing commercial properties-Rental income assessable as business income-SLP of Revenue is dismissed.[S. 22, Art. 136].

PCIT v. M. P. Entertainment and Developers Pvt. Ltd. (2024)469 ITR 428/ 302 Taxman 361 (SC) Editorial : PCIT v. M. P. Entertainment and Developers Pvt. Ltd. (2024)469 ITR 421 (MP)(HC)

S. 18 : Interest on securities-Banks-Interest received at time of sale of securities-Assessable as interest on securities and not as income from business. [S. 28(i), 136]

CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (No. 7) (2024)469 ITR 417 (SC) Editorial: CIT v. Citi Bank N. A (ITR.No. 265 of 1997 dt. 10-4-2003)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty- Deduction of tax at source-Payments to Non-Residents-Telecommunications operators for providing inter-connectivity services and transfer of capacity in foreign countries-Not chargeable to tax as royalty-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 195, 201, Art. 136]

Dy. DIT v. Vodafone Idea Ltd. (2024)469 ITR 391 (SC) Editorial : Vodafone Idea Ltd v. Dy.CIT (2023) 457 ITR 189(Karn)(HC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Deduction of tax at source-Payment to Non-Resident-Royalty User licence agreement for use of computer software by Non-Resident supplier to distributor and resold to resident end-user, or directly supplied to resident end-user-Not royalty for use of Copyright in computer software-Not liable to deduct tax at source-Review petition is dismissed on account of delay of 515 days and also on the merits. [S. 195, Copyright Act, 1957, S. 14(a), 14(b), 30]

CIT v. GE India Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd. (2024)469 ITR 389 // 2025) 345 CTR 754 / 252 DTR 177 (SC) Editorial: Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt Ltd v. CIT (2021) 432 ITR 471 (SC) is reaffirmed.

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Accrual-Banks-Interest on bad and doubtful debts is not taxable.[S. 5, 119, Art. 136]

CIT v. Standard Chartered Bank (2024)469 ITR 408 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Standard Chartered Bank, ITR No. 87 of 1996 dt 16-7-2003 (Ker)(HC)

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Accrual-Interest on sticky advances credited to memorandum account is not taxable. [S. 145, Art. 136]

CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (NO. 3) (2024)469 ITR 403 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Citi Bank N. A ITR No. 191 of 1997 dt. 10-4-2003(Bom)(HC)

S. 147: Reassessment – Limitation – TOLA did not apply as the limitation period expired before 20.03.2020- Notice under section 148 issued in 31-7-2022, which is beyond the prescribed time limit – Reassessment held to be invalid. [S. 68, 133(6), 142(1), 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 149, 151, 154, 115JB]

CLE Private Ltd. v. DCIT (Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org