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. 68 : Cash credits-Share capital-Non-resident-Mauritius based holding company-Proviso does not apply to non-resident company-Proved identity and genuineness by filing the bank account statement of itself and the certificate of incorporation-Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed.
Cleartrip (P) Ltd v. DCIT (2023) 37 NYPTTJ 1373 / 156 taxmann.com 552 / (2024) 228 TTJ 178 / 235 DTR 129 (Mum) (Trib)
S. 68 : Cash credits-Share application money-Survey-Statement on oath-Retraction-Produced documents of all investors-Merely on the basis of statement addition is not valid-Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Reassessment on the basis of statement in the course of survey is valid.[S.133A, 147, 148]
ACIT v. Jagannathdas Harichandmal Jewellers (P) Ltd (2023) 37 NYPTTJ 1512 /(2024) 167 taxmann.com 17 / 228 TTJ 68 (Raipur)(Trib)
S. 68 : Cash credits-Loan-Genuineness is proved-TDS deducted-Addition is deleted.
Aman Exports International v. Dy.CIT(2024) 228 TTJ 26 (UO) (Jaipur)(Trib)
S. 45 : Capital gains-Full value of consideration-Amount kept in escrow account-Share purchase agreement-The unreleased amount kept is escrow account as deposits cannot be assessed as sale consideration-Amount can be taxed in later years in respective years of receipt or accrual.[S. 4,5, 48]
Modi Rubber Ltd. v. DCIT (2024) 228 TTJ 848 / 236 DTR 145 / 38 NYPTTJ 212 (Delhi)(Trib)
S. 40A(3) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Cash payments exceeding prescribed limits-Failure to produce the evidence to demonstrate that each bill is less than Rs.20,000-Addition is affirmed.
Aman Exports International v. Dy.CIT(2024) 228 TTJ 26 (UO) (Jaipur)(Trib)
S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Amendment made by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer.
Royal Twinkle Star Club (P) Ltd. v.DCIT (2023) 152 taxmann.com 374 / 37 NYPTTJ 334 / (2024) 228 TTJ 991 (Mum) (Trib)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Advertisement and sales promotion-Order of CIT(A) deleting ad-hoc disallowance of 20% is affirmed.
Cleartrip (P) Ltd v. DCIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 552/37 NYPTTJ 1373 / (2024) 228 TTJ 178 / 235 DTR 129 / (Mum) (Trib)
S. 32 : Depreciation-User for business-Entitle to full deprecation for on the aircraft for the whole year. [S. 32 (1) (ii)]
India Flysafe Aviation Ltd. v. DCIT (2024) 159 taxmann.com 1219 / 228 TTJ 982 / 236 DTR 185 / 38 NYPTTJ 307 (Delhi)(Trib)
S.14A : Disallowance of expenditure-Exempt income-Apportionment of expenses-Demat charges-Interest expenses-Disallowance under R. 8D(2)(iii) is to be restricted to 0.5 per cent of the average value of investment which yielded exempt income in terms of statutory formula-The suo motu disallowance, no basis has been given by the assessee for making such ad hoc disallowance-AO shall be guided by the statutory formula. [R.8D(2)(ii)]
Modi Rubber Ltd. v. DCIT (2024) 228 TTJ 848 / 236 DTR 145 / 38 NYPTTJ 212 (Delhi)(Trib)