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. 35 : Expenditure on scientific research-Department of Scientific and Industrial research approved only part of expenditure claimed-Prior to 1-4-2016 there is no requirement of quantification of eligible expenditure incurred on in-house research and development facility has to be approved by prescribed authority-Entitled to 200 Per Cent. of actual expenditure incurred on Scientific Research.[S.35(2AB]
Pharmanza Herbal P. Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2024)115 ITR 612 / 164 taxmann.com 1297 (Ahd)(Trib)
S. 35 : Expenditure on scientific research-Purchase of capital equipment for research facility-Clinical trial expenditure allowed by Tribunal in earlier years which is up held by High Court-Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed-Central Board Of Direct Taxes Circular No. 14(Xl-35), Dated 11-4-1955. [S.35(2AB)]
Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT (2024)115 ITR 428 / 162 taxmann.com 229 (Ahd)(Trib)
S.14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Disallowance cannot exceed exempt income-Addition to book profit is deleted. [S.115JB, R.8D]
Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT (2024) 115 ITR 51 ((SN)/ 164 taxmann.com 52 (Ahd)(Trib)
S.14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-No exempt income-Disallowance cannot be made. [R. 8D
ACIT v. Uniparts India Ltd(2023) 150 taxmann.com 142 / (2024)115 ITR 473 (Delhi)(Trib)
S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Suo motu disallowance-Disallowance is restricted to amount of exempt income.[R.8D]
Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT (2024)115 ITR 428/ 162 taxmann.com 229 (Ahd)(Trib)
S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Selling advertising in, and distribution of, television channels in India through Indian company-No transfer of copyright, title or ownership interest to Indian company-Receipts taxable as business income and not royalty-DTAA-India-USA.[S.9(1)(i), Art 12]
Turner Broadcasting System Asia Pacific Inc., USA v. Dy. CIT (2024) 115 ITR 21 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib)
S. 2(14)(iii) : Capital asset-Agricultural land-Sale of agricultural land-Land situated beyond 10 Kms. from Municipal limits-And Shown as wet land-Registration of immovable property by land Registrar-Paid land revenue-Cannot be assessed as capital gains. [S. 45]
Nataraj Ramaiah v.ITO (IT) (2024) 115 ITR 31 (SN)(Chennai) (Trib)
S. 56 : Income from other sources -Re development -Alternative accommodation of New flat of bigger size allotted from the builder in extinguishment of the old flat as per the redevelopment agreement – Cannot be assessed under section 56(2)(x) of the Act – A the most the said transaction may attract capital gains in which case the assessee should be entitle for deduction of cost of new flat u/s. 54 resulting in no tax liability – Addition is deleted . [ S.45, 54 ]
Anil Dattaram Pitale v. ITO, (Mum)(Trib.) www.itatonline .org .
S. 69: Unexplained Investments – Alleged on money – Purchase of flat – Survey statement – Opportunity of cross examination is not provided – Merely on the basis of statement of the accountant of the builder no addition can be made . [ S.132(4), 133A ]
Aarti Sudarshan Soni v. ITO, (Mum)(Trib.) www.itatonline.org
S. 268A : Appeal – Instructions -Circulars – Monetary limits – Revision –Penalty – Concealment penalty – Monitory limit is also applicable to proceedings under section 263 of the Act – The CIT u/s.263 of the Income- tax Act directed the AO to initiate a penalty for concealment, which was not originally initiated in the assessment order- Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner – On appeal as the tax effect involved is below threshold limit of 2 crores-The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed .[ S.260A ,263 , 271(1)( c) ]
PCIT v. Jayesh V. Sheth, (Bom)(HC) www.itatonline.org .