S. 145 : Method of accounting-Chit fund business-Accrual of income-Estimating the commission at five percent of gross chit collection is not proper-Matter remanded. [S. 5]
Gowrinath Chits Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 95 ITR 9 (SN)(Bang) (Trib)
Digest of case laws
Online digest of latest case laws
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. 145 : Method of accounting-Real estate development business–Recognizing income at time of delivery of possession to customer-Applying the percentage method of accounting is not justified.
ACIT v. D. D. Resorts Pvt. Ltd. (2022)95 ITR 1 (SN(Delhi) (Trib)S. 145 : Method of accounting-Inventory write off-Failure to provide the evidence-Not allowable as deduction. [S. 28(i)]
Herbalife International India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)100 ITR 456 (Bang) (Trib)S. 145 : Method of accounting-No defects in books of account-Estimation of GP was deleted-Forward dated bills duly accounted-Sufficient cash in hand-Deletion of addition is proper. [S.68, 145(3), 153A]
Roop Square P. Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 99 ITR 451 (Chd)(Trib)S. 145 : Method of accounting-Work in progress-Notional valuation-Consolidating books of account-Addition is deleted.[S. 69]
HCC Samsung Joint Venture v. ACIT (2022) 220 DTR 105 / 220 TTJ 671 (Mum)(Trib)S. 145 : Method of accounting-Valuation of stock-Joint venture-Addition on account of construction work-Addition was deleted.
HCC Samsung Joint Venture v. ACIT (2022) 220 DTR 105/ 220 TTJ 631/ (2023) 148 taxmann.com 119 (Mum)(Trib)S. 145 : Method of accounting-Difference between contractual receipts according to Form 26AS and in books of assessee-Meagre difference-Addition was deleted. [S. 5]
Narendra Laxmansingh Solanki v. Dy. CIT (2022) 98 ITR 10 (SN) (Ahd.)(Trib.)S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Draft assessment order was not forwarded to correct address-Order is barred by limitation [S. 92CA(3), 127(2) 153]
DSV Solutions (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 220 DTR 297 /144 taxmann.com 181 / (2023) 221 TTJ 310 (Mum)(Trib)S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Draft Assessment order-Procedure-Mandatory-Issue of demand notice and penalty notice along with draft assessment order-Assessment order was quashed. [S.143(3), 156]
Suretex Prophylactics (India) Ltd. v. ACIT (2022)96 ITR 275 (Bang)(Trib)S. 144C : Reference to dispute resolution panel-Rectification order-Not barred by limitation-Order was passed within six months from end of month in which original order was passed-It would not be open to Assessing Officer to hold giving effect to these directions even if said directions were found to be prima facie incorrect. [S. 92C,144C(13), R. 10]
Michael Page International Recruitment (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 219 DTR 57 / 99 ITR 65 / 220 TTJ 137 / 143 taxmann.com 253 (Mum)(Trib)