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. 45(3) : Capital gains-Transfer of capital asset to firm-Transfer of land to partnership firm by way of capital contribution-Consideration to be taken as per section 45(3) and not as per section 50C of the Act-Cost of land-Interest paid-Additional evidence-Matter remanded-Compensation paid to a waiving of its absolute right-Added to cost of improvement. [S. 45, 48, 50C]

Nareshbhai Ishwardas Patel. v. ITO (2023) 203 ITD 250 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax-Remission or cessation of trading liability-Loan-Never claimed as trading liability-Interest was claimed-Only interest can be added.

Shimmer Textiles (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2023) 203 ITD 769 (Kol) (Trib.)

S. 40A(2) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Excessive or unreasonable-Paid interest at rate of 18 per cent-Disallowed interest paid in excess of 12 percent-Disallowance is deleted. [S. 40A(2)(a), 40A(2)(b) , 40 (b)(iv)]

Genxt Mobile LLP. v. ACIT (2023) 203 ITD 794 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Below taxable income-Disallowance is not justified-Payment to Truck owner-Matter remanded. [S.192, 194C(6)]

Bhagwan Dass Jagan Nath. v. DCIT (2023] 203 ITD 400 (Chd) (Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Failed to produce end product qualitatively-Expenditure is not incurred for any infringement of law and rather, it was a by-product of commercial activity, said expenditure was not hit by Explanation 1 and section 37.

Farseen Rubber Industries Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 203 ITD 765 (Kol) (Trib.)

S.37(1) : Business expenditure-Fabricated agreement-Sales commission-Failure to provide supporting documents-Foreign travelling expenses of director–Sales promotion-Failure to produce evidence-Bogus expenditure-Disallowance is justified

Aditya Exim Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 106 ITR 331 / 203 ITD 496 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Abandoned project-Expansion of business by setting up a clinic is economically not viable-Loss is allowable as deduction-Capital expenditure-Constructing and running business of hospital is to be allowed as deduction under section 35AD-There is no condition of any date or year of commencement of specified business.[S.28(i) , 35AD]

Ambuja Neotia Healthcare Venture Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 203 ITD 143 (Kol) (Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Pooja and festival-Not allowable as business expenditure-Depreciation-Additional depreciation-Not produced relevant material-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer. [S. 32 (1)(iia)]

Alok Ferro Alloys Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 203 ITD 199 (Raipur) (Trib.)

S.37(1) : Business expenditure-Business of trading of drugs and medicines-Commission paid two doctors-Not allowable as deduction.

Sunflower Pharmacy. v. ITO (2023) 203 ITD 623 / 107 ITR 30 (SN (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 36(1)(iii) : Interest on borrowed capital-Interest paid at the rate of 13.50 per cent-Interest received at rate of 11.50 per cent-Disallowance of difference is justified.

Mitra Trading & Exports (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 203 ITD 395 (Mum)(Trib.)