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. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Reassessment-Accumulation of income-Filed revised form-Assessee could not be precluded from filing a revised Form No. 10 during reassessment proceedings.[S.11(2) 12A,143(1), 147, 148, Form No.10, Rule 17]
CIT (E) v. Canara Bank Relief and Welfare Society (2024) 297 Taxman 153 / 471 ITR 37(Delhi)(HC)
S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Construction activities under State PWD department-2.5 per cent supervision charges-Matter is remanded to Assessing Officer for determination of commercial activity and considering the benefit of section 12A. [S. 2(15), 12A]
Nirmithi Kendra v. Dy. CIT (E) (2024) 297 Taxman 382/ 336 CTR 743 (SC) Editorial : Nirmithi Kendra v. Dy. CIT (E) (2022) 141 taxmann.com 495 (Ker)(HC), set aside.
S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Fees for technical services-Consideration received by a company incorporated in Israel, for sale of software-Not royalty-No transfer of copyright in sale of off shelf software-Not taxable in India-DTAA-India-Israel. [S.9(1)(vii) art. 12]
CIT(IT) v. Cognyte Technologies Israel Ltd (2024) 297 Taxman 120 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Fees for technical services-Revenue from software sales to Indian clients, said revenue could not be treated as royalty and subjected to Indian taxation-DTAA-India-USA [S.9(1)(vii), 195, art. 12, Art.136]
CIT (IT) v. Microsoft Regional Sales Pte.Ltd (2024) 297 Taxman 535 (SC) Editorial : CIT(IT) v. Microsoft Regional Sales Pte.Ltd (2024) 159 taxmann.com 278 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 9(1)(i): Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Strategic Oversight services-Not royalty-Business income-Since hotel premises were at disposal of assessee in respect of its business activities, Tribunal had rightly held that assessee had a PE in India in form of fixed place through which it carried on its business-DTAA-India-UAE [S. 9(1)(vi), art. 5(2)(a), 12]
Hyatt International-Southwest Asia Ltd v. ADIT(2024) 297 Taxman 497 /464 ITR 508/ 337 CTR 39 (Delhi)(HC)/Editorial : Refer, Hyatt International Southwest Asia Ltd. v. ADCIT (2024) 340 CTR 633 242 DTR 177 / 166 Taxmann.com 466 (FB) (Delhi)(HC)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Wrong claim of deduction-Order of Tribunal deleting the penalty is affirmed.[S. 260A]
PCIT v. National Textiles Corporation Ltd (2023) 226 DTR 281 / (2024)462 ITR 224 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Furnishing inaccurate particulars-Order of penalty should clearly specify ground on which it is levied. [S. 260A]
PCIT v. Minu Bakshi (Ms.) (2024)462 ITR 301 (Delhi)(HC)