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. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Premium paid to allottee on redemption of debentures-Allowable as revenue expenditure.

Nitesh Housing Developers (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 290 Taxman 474 (Kar.)(HC)

S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-No exempt income received during the year-Disallowance cannot be made. [R. 8D]

PCIT v. Amadeus India (P.) Ltd. (2023) 290 Taxman 201 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 10AA : Special economic zones-Export turnover-Telecommunication expenses were to be excluded from export turnover.

Subex Ltd v. Addl.CIT (2022) 145 taxmann.com 176 (Karn.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of Revenue dismissed, Addl. CIT v. Subex Ltd. (2023) 290 Taxman 102 (SC)

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Non-resident-Providing satellite transmission services is not royalty-Order of Tribunal affirmed-DTAA-India-Netherland. [S. 260A, Art. 12]

CIT (IT) v. New Skies Satellite BV (2023) 290 Taxman 170 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 2(14)(iii) : Capital asset-Agricultural land-Mango, orchard-Situated beyond 8 kms. of City corporation-Sale proceeds of land is entitled to exemption. [S. 45]

K.M. Bopanna (HUF) v. Dy. CIT (2023) 290 Taxman 298 (Karn.)(HC)

S.147: Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – Mutual fund Spill over expenses, offer expenses, SEBI Registration fee – On the same set of facts reassessment order is bad in law – Assessing Officer has no power to review the assessment order – Order of reassessment was quashed [ S. 148 ]

JM Financial Asset Management Ltd v. DCIT ( Mum)(Trib) www.itatonline .org

S. 40(b)(v) : Amounts not deductible – Partner – Remuneration – Supplementary deed operates retrospectively if the deed is in accordance with the law – Disallowance of remuneration was deleted [ S. 40(b)(ii) ]

Jetkool Exports India v. NFAC ( Mum)( Trib) www.itatonline .org .

S. 281B : Provisional attachment-Mere apprehension that huge demand would be made is not sufficient-Tangible reasons are required-Grant of approval cannot be mechanical-Approval for attachment cannot be given without considering facts. [Art. 226]

Xiaomi Technology India Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 451 ITR 58 / 330 ITR 113 / 221 DTR 225 // 291 Taxman 315 (Karn.)(HC)

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Failure to produce accounts and documents-Admission regarding Foreign Bank account after an investigation by department-Revised return was filed after issue of notice-Failure to disclose foreign account opened in year 1991 when the assessee was 55 years of age-Cannot take benefit of circular recommending any prosecution where the assessee is aged 70 years or more at time of offence-Launching of prosecution is justified. [S. 132, 153A, 271, 271(1)(b), 274, 276C(1), 276D, 277, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S. 245(2), Central Board Of Direct Taxes Instruction No. 5051, Dated 7-2-1991]

Rajinder Kumar v. State. (2023) 451 ITR 338 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 275 : Penalty-Bar of limitation-Limitation-Limitation starts from the date of assessment when the Assessing Officer initiates penalty proceedings and not from the date of sanction for penalty proceedings. [S. 271D, 275(1)(c)]

PCIT v. Rishikesh Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (2023)451 ITR 108 (Delhi)(HC) PCIT v. Rishikesh Properties Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 451 ITR 108 (Delhi)(HC) PCIT v. Rupa Promoters Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 451 ITR 108 (Delhi)(HC)