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. 69A : Unexplained money-Survey-Undisclosed income was offered net of expenses excluding expenses claimed in profit and loss account-Set off of business loss and depreciation is to be allowed-Matter remanded. [S. 32, 72, 133A]

Shanti Enterprises v. Dy. CIT (2021) 88 ITR 31 (SN) (Surat)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Rotation of disclosed funds between group entities-Addition cannot be made as cash credits-Proof of creditworthiness was supplied-Addition cannot be made without making further enquiry. [S. 133(6)]

ITO v. Angel Cement Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 88 ITR 616 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 54EC : Capital gains-Investment in bonds-Invested Rs.50 lakhs in two different financial years-Entitle to deduction in both the years-Amendment is effective from assessment year 2015-16 and not applicable to earlier years. [S. 45]

Prima P. Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 88 ITR 45 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)

S. 54 : Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence-Long term or short term-Period of holding to be reckoned from date of allotment. [S. 2(29A), 2(29B), 2(42A), 2 (42B), 45]

Mahendrasingh Ramsingh Jadav v. ITO (2021) 88 ITR 157 (Bang.) (Trib.)

S. 50B : Capital gains-Slump sale-Amalgamation of Companies- Subsidiary-Balance consideration received from escrow agents by subsidiary after amalgamation on behalf of erstwhile Chennai Company-Taxed in hands of erstwhile Chennai company at Chandigarh -cannot be taxed again in hands of subsidiary in Chennai [S. 2(19AA), 2(42C), 72A]

ACIT v. Investment Trust of India Ltd. (2021) 88 ITR 566 / 211 TTJ 777/ 203 DTR 289(Chennai) (Trib.) Dy. CIT v. HFCL Infotel Ltd. (2021) 88 ITR 566/ 211 TTJ 777 / 203 DTR 289 (Chennai)(Trib.)

S. 45 : Capital gains-Cost of development paid under tripartite arrangement-Allowable as cost of improvement-Brokerage paid allowable as deduction. [S. 48]

DLF Universal Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 88 ITR 33 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 43(5) : Speculative transaction-Premium on forward cover – Commodity-Foreign exchange cover not contract for purchase of share or stock and does not fall within definition of commodity – Transaction not speculative.

ACIT v. Lifestyle International (P.) Ltd. (2021) 88 ITR 79 (Bang.) (Trib.)

S. 40A(2) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Excessive or unreasonable-Commission paid to subsidiary at lower rate than others-No disallowance can be made.

DLF Universal Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 88 ITR 33 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 40A(2) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Excessive or unreasonable-Professional fees-Onus shift on revenue to show expenses excessive and not legitimate-Assessing Officer cannot contend that the expenditure is not required at all. [S. 37(1)]

ACIT v. Lifestyle International (P.) Ltd. (2021) 88 ITR 79 (Bang.) (Trib.)

S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Interest on deposits-Tax not deducted-Declaration was furnished by depositors-Disallowance was deleted. [S. 194A, 197A(1), Form No. 15G]

B. Nanji A. v. ITO (2021)88 ITR 29 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.)