HIGH COURT RULING Sagun Foundry Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (D ated ......HIGH COURT RULING...

HIGH COURT RULING

2016-TIOL-3162-HC-ALL-IT

Sagun Foundry Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (Dated: December 21, 2016)

Whether employer can claim deduction in respect of employees contribution towardsPF and ESI, if such contribution has been deposited after the due date prescribedunder the relevant labour statutes but prior to filing of return u/s 139(1) - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-3161-HC-P&H-IT

Tribune Trust Vs CIT (Dated: December 23, 2016)

Whether the objects of a trust can be declared as charitable in nature, if the said trustis engaged in publication of newspapers which was running on commercial lines andhad accordingly accumulated huge profits, without any indication that it was for theadvancement of general public utility - NO: HC

Whether a trust which is making profit on account of its ancillary activities is entitled tobenefit of Section 11, where the predominant activity of such trust was townimprovement and it was established for the purpose of advancement of general publicutility - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-3159-HC-AHM-IT

PR CIT Vs Poddar Developers (Dated: December 6, 2016)

Whether deduction claimed in respect of construction of housing projects u/s 80IB canbe denied merely on the basis that 'building use permission' for certain fullyconstructed buildings was granted subsequently - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-3158-HC-MUM-IT

Kolte Patil Developers Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: December 8, 2016)

Whether when there is no explanation given for delay in filing of appeal, such delay infiling cannot be condoned - YES: HC


Takshashila Realties Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: December 5, 2016)

Whether once a scheme for amalgamation has been sanctioned by HC, then theamalgamating Company is to be considered as non existent, and any fresh notice forreassessment against such company, cannot be sustained - YES: HC


Stock Exchange Vs Tax Recovery Officer (Dated: December 8, 2016)

Whether when the stock Exchange has a priority on the security deposits over theIncome Tax Department in respect of membership card licensed to its members, it isnot allowable to the Revenue officer to exercise a pre-emptive action in that regard -YES: HC

2016-TIOL-3153-HC-DEL-IT

PR CIT Vs Lemon Tree Hotels Pvt Ltd (Dated: December 2, 2016)

Whether previous orders passed by the Tribunal relating to disallowance of ESOPexpenses, after taking note of the relevent judgments of higher forums, warrants writinterference - NO: HC


CIT Vs Noida Golf Course Socieity (Dated: December 15, 2016)

Whether interest earned by a club out of the investment made in mutual funds with anon-member bank, would attract the principle of mutuality - NO: HC


CIT Vs Gulab Devi Memorial Hospital Trust (Dated: December 23, 2016)

Whether registration u/s 12A and the exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) would by itself,entitle the concerned trust/hospital to the grant of exemption u/s 80G - NO: HC

Whether such trust is entitled to exemption u/s 80G where a part of the surplusgenerated by it was ploughed back for expansion purposes - YES: HC

Also see analysis of the order


CIT Vs Subhash Vinayak Supnekar (Dated: December 14, 2016)

Whether the sale consideration received in advance under an 'Agreement to Sale' of acapital asset, if invested in specified bonds, would entitle the assessee to benefit ofSection 54EC - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-3149-HC-KOL-IT

Korp Resources Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: December 22, 2016)

Whether the Writ Court can go into the disputed fact of whether or not an entity haswindow-dressed its accounts by showing contributions on account of share subscriptionmoney by paper companies - NO: HC


Nandesari Industries Association Vs DCIT (Dated: December 13, 2016)

Whether notice for reopening can be issued, when the AO has not recorded anyallegation against the assessee regarding failure to disclose true and correct factsnecessary for assessment, in the reasons for reopening - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-3147-HC-KERALA-IT

Oriental Shopping Complex Vs ACIT (Dated: November 22, 2016)

Whether when a decision has been rendered without appropriately appreciating thefacts & evidences on record, such a case is fit for remand before the lower authority -YES: HC


Susham Singla Vs CIT (Dated: December 23, 2016)

Whether the annual value of every second property owned by an individual, whichadmittedly remained vacant throughout the year would be assessable u/s 23(1)(a) –YES: HC



CIT Vs Bharati Krida Pratishthan (Dated: December 15, 2016)

Whether when the tax effect involved in an appeal filed before High Court is less thanthe minimum tax effect mentioned in the CBDT circular, no such appeal is maintainable- YES: HC

2016-TIOL-3142-HC-MAD-IT

Edhayam Frozen Foods Pvt Ltd Vs Tax Recovery Officer (Dated: November 28,2016)

Whether I-T Department can claim precedence over a secured creditor in proceedingfor recovery of tax arrears under the Enforcement of Security Interest and Recovery ofDebts Laws and Miscellaneous Provisions (Amendment) Act, 2016 - NO: HC


CIT Vs Inland Waterways Authority (Dated: December 14, 2016)

Whether when an assessee has not earned any income due to non-commencement ofits business, then the subsidy received from Govt cannot be taxed as revenue receipt -YES: HC


PR CIT Vs UK Paints India Pvt Ltd (Dated: December 6, 2016)

Whether provisions of Section 14A can be invoked by the AO by rejecting the suo-motodisallowances made by assessee, without assigning any reasons – NO: HC


Principal.CIT Vs Gulmohar Green Golf And Country Club Ltd (Dated: November16, 2016)

Whether the security deposit/membership fees, which is refundable after a stipulatedperiod of 25 years upon dissolution of the club, is to be treated as 'Capital Receipt' –YES: HC

Whether merely because such security deposit is subsequently utilized by the club forother purposes such as construction and providing other amenities at the club, thesame shall not loose the "character of deposit" - YES: HC


2016-TIOL-3133-HC-ORISSA-IT

Liberty Marine Syndicate Pvt Ltd Vs Principal.CIT (Dated: November 22, 2016)

Whether issuance of notice upon the assessee is necessary before invoking thejurisdiction conferred on the I-T Authorities under the provision of Section 132 – NO:

HC

Whether issuance of notice u/s 153A is justified, when assessee's premises wassubjected to search & seizure u/s 132 upon failure on the part of assessee to complywith notices issued u/s 143(2) and 142(1) – YES: HC


CIT Vs Bharti Hexacom Ltd (Dated: November 22, 2016)

Whether lease rent paid to the owner for use of its software and equipments, can beamortized in assessee's books of accounts as revenue expenses - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-3131-HC-AHM-CX

Cadila Pharmaceutical Ltd Vs CCE (Dated: November 10, 2016)

CX – MODVAT - Officers of the Department failed to examine the admissibility orotherwise of the claim of the assessee and defaced the invoices submitted by theassessee by putting the endorsement "Modvat Credit availed under rule 57" whichmeans that the Department was aware that the assessee had claimed Modvat credit inrespect of the capital goods in question - When rule 57Q of the rules itself provides forthe description of the capital goods which are eligible for credit thereunder, and theinvoices submitted by the assessee clearly described the goods on which Modvat creditwas claimed, it cannot be said that there was any wilful misstatement or suppressionon the part of the assessee nor can it be said that there was any wilful contravention ofthe provisions of the Act or the rules with the intent to evade payment of duty so as toenable the respondents to invoke the larger period of limitation - Tribunal was,therefore, not justified in setting aside the order passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) and holding that the ground of bar of limitation could not be upheld - appealsucceeds and is accordingly allowed - Tribunal was not correct in holding that thedemands raised by the show cause notices were not barred by limitation under theproviso to section 11A of the CEA, 1944: High Court [para 14, 15]


PR CIT Vs Jigna Construction (Dated: September 27, 2016)

Whether when appropriate evidence has been adduced by the assessee, it is not in thepower of AO to arbitrarily disallow any item of expenditure on the ground that thesums are not verifiable - YES: HC

Whether in case the occasion to use silver utensils for the purpose of business ofassessee, arose 30 years after such utensils were purchased, can the same beconsidered to have been purchased for business purposes - NO: HC


Ashok Surana Vs CIT (Dated: April 15, 2016)

Whether when appropriate evidence has been adduced by the assessee, it is not in thepower of AO to arbitrarily disallow any item of expenditure on the ground that thesums are not verifiable - YES: HC

Whether in case the occasion to use silver utensils for the purpose of business ofassessee, arose 30 years after such utensils were purchased, can the same beconsidered to have been purchased for business purposes - NO: HC


CIT Vs Somani Stock Broking Pvt Ltd (Dated: April 11, 2016)

Whether when an assessee is engaged in business as well as speculation activities, inorder to compute profits from both the activities separately, segregation of totalexpenses incurred is a precondition - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-3124-HC-KAR-IT

Sri K Venkatesh Dutt Vs TRO (Dated: September 16, 2016)

Whether order of attachment stands vacated when no sale of immoveable propertiestakes place within a period of three years, from the end of the FY in which order givingrise to demand is passed - YES: HC


Kapoor Carpets Vs CIT (Dated: October 21, 2016)

Whether accounting can be done by revenue authorities by application of Sec. 145(3),when exact figures are available with them - NO: ITAT

2016-TIOL-3122-HC-MEGHALAYA-IT

CMJ Foundation Vs UoI (Dated: July 28, 2016)

Whether writ petition can be filed against the matter which is already pending beforethe appellate authority - NO: HC


CIT Vs Hassan Hajee And Company (Dated: September 28, 2016)

Whether judicious application of mind by the Tribunal to the particular facts andcircumstances of the case, is sine qua non before conclusion of case -YES: HC


Central U P Gas Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: December 8, 2016)

Whether when it is clear that compressed natural gas in its compressed form has adistinct identity and character and use, which acquires the trait of 'manufacture', insuch case deduction u/s 80IA cannot be denied - YES: HC



CIT Vs Arch Fine Chemicals Pvt Ltd (Dated: December 6, 2016)

Whether when an identical issue raised by assessee has been decided in its favour bythe High Court, no final order can be passed by an ITAT without referring such HC'sdecision - YES: HC


Punjab Sind Dairy Vs DCIT (Dated: December 13, 2016)

Whether rejection of books is sustainable, where the Assessee failed to produce theRegisters indicating Production, Issuance and Consumption – YES: HC

Whether the estimation of income on the basis of the material on record and thestatements made by the employees and directors during search and surveyproceedings is arbitrary – NO: HC


JMD Plytech Vs JCIT (Dated: December 9, 2016)

Whether in case of impounding of books of accounts during survey, an assessee can begranted an opportunity to raise a plea with regard to forwarding those books to aForensic Science Laboratory in order to establish certain facts - YES: HC


Principal.CIT Vs Anil Nagpal (Dated: December 14, 2016)

Whether reopening deserves to be sustained, when during the original assessmentproceedings the AO had raised query and sought informations which was admittedlysupplied and on the basis of the same material the case is sought to be reopened –NO: HC


CIT Vs Sukhwani Buildcon (Dated: December 19, 2016)

Whether an assessee can be denied deduction u/s 80IB(10), in case it has nottransferred a property by combining 3 flats together, whose area is less than themaximum limit mentioned in the said provision - NO: HC


CIT Vs Quality Council Of India (Dated: December 14, 2016)

Whether the mere collection of amounts from commercial activity by assessee society,could result in the assessees losing their essential character of being established forcharitable purposes - NO: HC


Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority Vs DDIT (Dated: December 9,2016)

Whether withdrawal of registration u/s 12A for subsequent A.Ys, can be a ground toinitiate reopening of previous A.Ys wherein the concerned institution was allowedexemption u/s 11 on basis of the said registration - NO: HC



CIT Vs Hsbc Invest Direct India Ltd (Dated: December 19, 2016)

Whether Rule 8D can be applied for computation of reasonable expenditure u/s 14Aonly for assessments done subsequent to AY 2008-09 - YES: HC

Whether ex parte membership fee paid by an assessee for obtaining club membership,can be allowed as revenue expenditure as per the provisions of section 37(1) - YES:HC


KLB Securities Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (Dated: December 9, 2016)

Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated on the very same ground on which theaudit objections are raised, can be considered valid, even if the AO does not agree withsuch audit objections - NO: HC


Kutch Textiles Pvt Ltd Vs ITO (Dated: December 13, 2016)

Whether when there is complete disclosure on the part of assessee for producing trueand correct facts necessary for the purpose of assessment, is it open to the AO toreopen assessment u/s 147 beyond the period of four years - NO: HC


CIT Vs Ohm Stock Broker Pvt Ltd (Dated: December 16, 2016)

Whether transaction charges paid to the Stock Exchange in respect of stock brokingexercise, is subject to deduction of tax at source u/s 194J - NO: HC


CIT Vs DLF Universal Ltd (Dated: December 21, 2016)

Whether an assessee is permitted to appropriate his expenses by using any method ofaccounting, till he is following a uniform pattern of revenue recognition - YES: HC

Whether when a township developer has consistently treated the amounts lying with itas profits, and brought the same to tax only upon execution of the conveyance deed,then a mere possibility that certain buyers can be handed over the possession earlierper se would result in any loss to Revenue - NO: HC


Rasid Lala Vs ITO (Dated: November 29, 2016)

Whether when it has been pointed out that an assessee has been expired long back, isit possible for the revenue authority to issue a fresh notice of reassessment in suchdeceased assessee's name - NO: HC


PR CIT Vs Unipon India Ltd (Dated: December 6, 2016)

Whether when CIT(A) as well as ITAT on the basis of special Audit Report filed byassessee, has concluded that source of unexplained cash credit has been dulyexplained, no addition u/s 69 is warranted - YES: HC


Inter Craft Ltd Vs CIT (Dated: December 14, 2016)

Whether the amounts of advance tax paid prior to the declaration under Kar Vivad

Samadhan Scheme, can be adjusted while determining the tax arrears – NO: HC



CIT Vs Bhushan Steels And Strips Ltd (Dated: December 1, 2016)

Whether assessee is entitled to depreciation u/s 32 even when he was not the owner ofthe property but was in possession thereof as a lessee during the concerned year –Yes: HC

2016-TIOL-3084-HC-PATNA-IT

Ashirbad Enterprises Vs CIT (Dated: December 15, 2016)

Whether penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is leviable on the income which was concealed byassessee by claiming false deductions of interest on bogus cash credit which wassurrendered before Settlement Commission and immunity was granted with respect tothe same u/s 245H - No: HC


Principal.CIT Vs Shaurya Infrasturcture (Dated: December 6, 2016)

Whether deduction claimed in respect of construction of housing projects u/s 80IB, canbe denied merely on the basis that 'building use permission' for certain fullyconstructed buildings was granted subsequently - NO: HC


Trans Corporate Advisory Services Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (Dated: December 7, 2016)

Whether when the reopening is performed to verify the nature of receipts from therecords available with the Department, the same cannot be considered as unlawful ifthe assessee has been given due opportunity of hearing - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-3078-HC-MUM -IT

Reliance Infrastructure Ltd Vs CIT (Dated: December 20, 2016)

Whether if in order to claim a deduction, an assessee needs to fulfill certain conditions,non-satisfaction of such conditions would automatically imply dis-entitlement fromsuch benefit - YES: HC

Whether in order to claim benefit of double taxation provisions u/s 91, the foreignincome which has been subjected to tax must be the same income which is subjectedto tax under the Indian Act - YES: HC

Whether the quantum of tax paid in foreign country, attributable to income arising oraccruing in India needs to be reduced for the purposes of computing the income onwhich tax is payable in India u/s 91 - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-3077-HC-ORISSA -IT

Dr Monu Pattanayak (HUF) Vs Principal CCIT (Dated: December 1, 2016)

Whether transfer of case from the jurisdiction of one ITO to another due to policydecision of re-structuring in the I-T Department, without affording hearing opportunityto assessee, can be declared as illegal, where the assessee is not prejudiced by such

decision – YES: HC



CIT Vs KPMG India Pvt Ltd (Dated: December 9, 2016)

Whether when the tax effect mentioned in the appeal memo is less than the minimumtax effect required for raising a particular appeal, in comparison of the limit given inCBDT circular, no appeal can be raised before the High Court - YES: HC


CIT Vs Larsen And Toubro Ltd (Dated: December 13, 2016)

Whether the order of High Court rendered in a particular decision is binding upon allthe courts within a State, unless the same has been stayed by an higher forum - YES:HC


Sandip Bhikhubhai Padsala Vs ITO (Dated: November 19, 2016)

Whether reopening can be sustained, where the assessment order was made afterscrutiny of the relevant materials called from the assessee and there was no tangiblematerial available with the AO to opine escapement of income – NO: HC


Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: December 14,2016)

Whether where in a previous year decision, the final pronouncement has been made inassessee's favour by CIT(A), the claim for stay for demand raised in similar issuebefore similar authority cannot be denied - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-3070-HC-AHM-WT

Vasudev G Gajjar Vs DCWT (Dated: November 10, 2016)

Whether the "Stock Exchange Card" of the Ahmedabad Stock Exchange held by a non-defaulting member is an "Asset" in the hands of the Assessee and hence exigible towealth tax - YES: HC



Takshashila Realties Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: September 6, 2016)

Whether a Revenue can ask for special audit of the assessee company for relevant AY,when the order is backed by proper materials on record, valid reasons and afterexchange of multiple queries with the assessee on the issue - YES : HC

Whether without any proposal in the show cause notice, can Revenue expand thescope of special audit by asking for audit of other entities along with assessee for no ofyears - NO : HC


Jagdish R Mookhey Vs ITO (Dated: December 6, 2016)

Whether where an assessee has relied on the postal acknowledgment card to urge thatno reasons for reopening was actually received by him, even though the same werevalidly served by the Department, such matter requires factual re-adjudication - YES:HC


Middle Income Group-III CO-OP HSG Society Ltd Vs ITO (Dated: December 7,2016)

Whether objections to the reasons recorded for reopening an assessment, can bedisposed of merely by stating that the same would be considered during the regularassessment proceedings - NO: HC


Principal CIT Vs Petronet V K Ltd (Dated: November 29, 2016)

Whether where the ITAT had deleted the disallowance of depreciation on plant &machinery in a previous year, the AO is not permitted to disallow the depreciation inthe subsequent year when nothing contrary has been proved - YES: HC


Synbiotics Ltd Vs UoI (Dated: November 14, 2016)

Whether it would be appropriate to dismiss the petition after 12 yrs on the ground ofavailability of alternative statutory remedy by way of an appeal against the impugnedorder of penalty passed u/s 271(1)(c) - NO: HC

Whether once the High Court held in favour of the assessee with respect to the DPCOliability, subsequently the AO, CIT(A) or ITAT cannot hold against the assessee anddisallow claim of DPCO liability - YES: HC


Muktanandgiri Maheshgiri Vs District Development Officer (Dated: November29, 2016)

Whether compensation & interest awarded to an assessee in pursuence of acquisitionof his land for public purposes under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, can besubjected to Income Tax - NO: HC

Whether such assessee can be fastened with the liability to deduct TDS on thecompensation award, when the award itself is not taxable under the provisions of I-TAct - NO: HC



Bharat Parenterals Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: November 21, 2016)

Whether reopening is justified, when the reassessment proceedings are initiated at theinstance of audit party and solely on the basis of audit objections – No: HC

Whether reopening is sustainable, where the assessee's claim of deduction u/s 35 wasscrutinized by the AO while passing the original assessment order and specific querieswere raised in the scrutiny assessment proceedings by the AO with respect to theclaim of deduction which were duly replied by the assessee – No: HC


PR CIT Vs Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd (Dated: December 9, 2016)

Whether payment made to a contractor would fall within the domain of Section 194J, ifsuch payment was not for rendering any technical services and the contractualstipulations are to ensure that the equipment supplied by contractor is of the requisitespecifications - NO: HC

Whether non-application of Section 194C on a contractal payment, would by itselfprovides for deemed application of Section 194J - NO: HC


Paramount Enterprises Vs ACIT (Dated: December 7, 2016)

Whether mere absence of words "failure to disclose fully and truly all materialparticulars" in the recording of reasons for reassessment, is fatal to issue ofreassessment notice - NO: HC

Whether the instructions given by an authority to the AO to give top priority to certaincases as they are getting time barred, can be considered as a direction to issue areopening notice - NO: HC


Punjab State Cooperative Federation Of House Building Societies Ltd Vs CIT(Dated: December 7, 2016)

Whether when an assessee has not claimed deduction u/s 57 in respect of incomeearned from other sources and taxed u/s 56, such an assessee can be granted anadditional opportunity of being heard by way of remand - YES: HC


C K Ahuja Vs CIT (Dated: December 5, 2016)

Whether when an assessee is having other sources of income and termination of acontract is a normal incident of his business, then the compensation received on suchcancellation could be construed as a capital receipt - NO: HC



Dr Gautam Sen Vs CCIT (Dated: December 7, 2016)

Whether when the Revenue officer have conducted a search proceeding wrongly on thebasis of mistaken identity, no order of assessment can be passed against an innocentassessee - NO: HC

Whether it is allowed on the part of a Revenue authority not to take a valid decision,particularly when want of such decision affects citizens - NO: HC


CIT Vs Mahavir Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd (Dated: November 23, 2016)

Whether an amount credited in the bank account of assessee can be considered by theAO as unexplained investment as per section 69 - NO: HC


Mihir Jayendra Thakore Vs DCIT (Dated: November 29, 2016)

Whether in case the previous AO has allowed certain claim but the subsequent officerbelieves that AO ought to have disallowed such claim, this belief has to be construedas a change of opinion on the basis of which a reassessment cannot be made - YES:HC


CIT Vs Sahara India Savings & Investment Coprn Ltd (Dated: October 19,2016)

Whether the question of law raised can be answered in favour of Revenue whenproceedings in the present appeal are consequential proceedings and similar questionsraised has been passed in Revenue's favour in earlier proceedings - YES : HC


CIT Vs Suresh G Wadhwa (Dated: December 5, 2016)

Whether a party's right to interpret the order of the ITAT can be pre-empted, underthe garb of clarification of an order - NO: HC


R Prabhakar Reddy Vs Tax Recovery Officer (Dated: December 6, 2016)

Whether where residential house of assessee is intended to be sold by Department,that too for higher consideration than that of demand pending against assessee, suchan assessee deserves grant of interim relief after making partial pre deposit - YES: HC


Aravali Infrapower Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: December 1, 2016)

Whether reopening of assessment is justified, when the bank statements as well as theITR form disclosing returns raise more questions than satisfy the queries of AO - Yes:HC


Andrew Telecommunications India Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.CIT (Dated: December 13,2016)

Whether stay on demand should be granted by the AO as per the CBDT officeinstructions when such demand stands disputed before the CIT(A) - YES: HC


Ram Saran Vs CCIT

Whether when the returns filed by assessee were once accepted by AO and acted uponby them, is it possible for such authority to consider them non est subsequently - NO:HC

Whether when the assessee has made a representation for waiver of interest, whichwas partially accepted and an order has been passed u/s 119(2)(a), an appeal can stillbe filed against such order - NO: HC



CIT Vs Wipro Ge Medical System Ltd

Whether expenditure should be confined only to manufacturing division and not equallydistributed to all units of respective employee cost based on pay roll, travel and livingcost of employees, R & D expenditure etc., while computing deduction u/s 10A – NO:HC

Whether while computing deduction u/s 80HHE, the total turnover should be computedon the business carried on by assessee and not only on the profits of the undertakingwhich was considered for deduction under the said provision – Yes:


Inventys Research Co Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT

Whether while disposing of the objections raised by assessee, which have not beenaddressed by him in an earlier order, the AO has to consider the interim stay grantedby a superior authority - YES: HC


CIT Vs Devkumar Haresh Vaidya (Dated: December 5, 2016)

Whether when the assessee has itself offered capital gains tax on the basis of'Agreement to sell' & 'Considerations for sale thereon', is it desirable for the AO to forman opinion regarding escaped income, merely on ground of amendment with regard toextent of exemption on capital gains - NO: HC


S Sevugan Chettiar Vs PR CCIT (Dated: December 2, 2016)

Whether a retired employee can be denied the benefit of exemptions granted by CBDTu/s 119 to such class, solely on the ground that he had filed revised return beyond theperiod stipulated u/s 139(5) - NO: HC

Whether where a default in complying with the provisions of the I-T Act was due tocircumstances beyond the control of the assessee, the CBDT is authorised to relax therequirement contained in Chapter IV or Chapter VI-A - YES: HC

Whether benefits extended by CBDT u/s 119(2) for all retirees under Early Retirementoption Scheme, can be denied to a similarly placed retiree on ground of belated filingof revised return, if such default was due to circumstances beyond his control - NO: HC



RNS Infrastructure Ltd Vs Income Tax Settlement Commissioner (Dated:December 7, 2016)

Whether the order passed by the Settlement Commission beyond the limitationprovided u/s 245D(4A)(iii) is sustainable in law – NO: HC


Krupesh Ghanshyambhai Thakkar Vs DCIT (Dated: November 29, 2016)

Whether reopening is sustainable, when it was done only for the purpose of re-verification of assessee's claim and there was no tangible material to form an opinionthat income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment – No: HC


Aegis Ltd Vs UoI (Dated: December 1, 2016)

Whether where in a case, representation of facts along with the refund application arepending, then processing of return can be undertaken in the light of constitutionalchallenge raised before the High Court - NO: HC


Aegis Ltd Vs UoI (Dated: December 1, 2016)

Whether during pendency of a representation & refund application, processing ofreturn cannot be undertaken on account of constitutional challenges raised before HighCourt - YES: HC


Jeevan Investment And Finance Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (Dated: December 7, 2016)

Whether the exercise of revisional jurisdiction by CIT u/s 263 is warranted, where theAO after having asked a pertinent question of the method of valuation of unlistedshares, failed to pursue that line of enquiry - YES: HC

Whether merely asking a question which goes to the root of the matter and notcarrying it further, is a case of non-enquiry, if the query is not otherwise satisfied bythe assessee while responding to another query - YES: HC

Whether the failure of assessee to answer to the queries made by AO and thenegligence of AO in not pursuing that line of enquiry, is apparent error warrantinginterference by CIT u/s 263 - YES: HC



CIT Vs Ratnakar Bank Ltd (Dated: December 6, 2016)

Whether an issue as to the face value of securities traded by assessee whether less ormore than the book value after amortization, requires a factual verification by the AO -

YES: HC


PR CIT Vs Union India Ltd (Dated: December 6, 2016)

Whether when the assessee has discharged its onus by submitting necessary materialin support of his contention that an addition u/s 69C need not be made, thereafteronus shifts upon the AO to prove otherwise - YES: HC

Whether in case there is no evidence whatsoever collected by AO that an assesseeincurred expenditure towards discounting of cheques, is it still possible for such AO tomake addition on that account - NO: HC


PR CIT Vs Space Power Controls Pvt Ltd (Dated: November 21, 2016)

Whether when the Tribunal after carrying out an elaborate exercise of fact discussion,relying on a SC decision, has decided that penalty in certain case need not be levied,can the HC intervene in such proceedings - NO: HC


PR CIT Vs Mahesh Kumar Gupta (Dated: November 22, 2016)

Whether when search operations did not yield any fresh material warranting additionu/s 153A, could it clothe CIT with the authority to add an amount on the basis of freshappraisal of the existing materials that already form part of original assessment - NO:HC



United Associates Vs PR CIT (Dated: November 21, 2016)

Whether for a valid order of transfer of assessment, the CIT has to adduce cogentreasons instead of citing vague propositions which only establish convenience of theRevenue at the cost of inconvenience of assessee - YES: HC


CIT Vs National Rifle Association Of India (Dated: November 22, 2016)

Whether any activity incidentally meant to promote the main charitable purpose ofassessee concern, could ipso-facto constitute commerce & trade and fall within themischief of the proviso to section 2(15) - NO: HC


Parkkot Maritima Agencies Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (Dated: November 15, 2016)

Whether when a assessee claims to have been in possession of additional voucherswhich could prove the expenditure in question, such a case is fit for remand forexamination of those vouchers - YES: HC


PR CIT Vs Goodview Trading Pvt Ltd (Dated: November 21, 2016)

Whether addition u/s 68 can be made where assessee has duly discharged its onus bysubmitting necessary evidence available to establish the bona fide of the transactions –No: HC



PR CIT Vs Dr William Britto (Dated: September 28, 2016)

Whether order passed by Commissioner u/s 263 stating that the AO had notinvestigated the sum which was not offered for taxation by assessee is justified, wherethe ITAT had given a categorical finding to the effect that the subject amount had beenassessed in the hands of the company and was transferred through a bankingtransaction – Yes: HC


Parkkot Maritima Agencies Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (Dated: November 15, 2016)

Whether additional evidence is admissible, where such evidence can help inestablishing the nature of expenditure – Yes: HC


Franchise India Holdings Ltd Vs ACIT (Dated: September 28, 2016)

Whether Commissioner in his administrative capacity and well within his rights can askhis subordinate to back his recommendation with reasons when the same were foundlacking – Yes: HC

Whether reopening of assessment is sustainable where the information regarding non-deduction of TDS by the assessee was not before the AO at the time of originalassessment – Yes: HC


Magma Fincorp Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: October 5, 2016)

Whether an assessee is entitled to enlarge the scope of scrutiny by urging groundswhich were not taken in the application on which the order under revision is made -NO: HC


Golden Investment Management Pvt Ltd Vs ITO (Dated: December 1, 2016)

Whether the attempt of I-T Department to serve notice of proceedings u/s 263 at theold address of assessee, can be considered as a good service of notice - NO: HC



PR CIT Vs Aarti Steels Ltd (Dated: November 28, 2016)

Whether it is necessary that disallowance u/s 14A is computed for correctly and not

academically, as it may have an effect in the future years on account of benefitaccorded to an assessee u/s 115JAA - YES: HC


PR CIT Vs Gursharan Kaur (Dated: December 2, 2016)

Whether when CIT(A) as well as Tribunal, after having analyzed all the facts andcircumstances, have decided that penalty u/s 271D need not be levied, can the HighCourt intervene even if no fresh evidences were filed by Revenue in that respect - NO:HC


CIT Vs Shiv Kant Mishra (Dated: December 1, 2016)

Whether when full disclosure has been made by the assessee with regard to theadditions made in its income, and no fresh material or documents are seized duringthe course of search, is it still possible to make additions u/s 158B(b) - NO: HC


Laxmi Automatic Loom Works Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: December 5, 2016)

Whether the benefit of exemption from Capital Gains Tax can be denied to anundertaking sought to be revived by the BIFR on the ground that after rehabilitation,the company has shown profitability – No: HC



Laxmi Business Promotions Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (Dated: April 15, 2016)

Whether the order of ITAT confirming addition on account of undisclosed investment issustainable in law, where the books of accounts maintained by the assessee did notreflect the investments appearing to have been made by the assessee from the seizeddocuments – Yes: HC


Aaa And Sons Enterprises Pvt Ltd Vs PR CIT (Dated: November 30, 2016)

Whether when the appropriate judicial authority has passed an order after properlyconsidering the evidences produced, giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee,the order thus passed can be challenged directly before the court in a Writ - NO: HC

Whether safeguard given to an assessee to protect himself from gross injustice beingdone by the Revenue Authorities entitle him to convert the writ court into an appellateauthority to examine the weight to be given to the evidence produced before suchauthorities - NO: HC


PR CIT Vs Atotech India Ltd (Dated: November 30, 2016)

Whether an assessee can be made liable to penalty for concealment of income, merelyin view of its change of stand in respect of its return of income filed for a particularassessment year - NO: HC


Triune Projects Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (Dated: November 22, 2016)

Whether a transaction of slump sale shall be deemed to be invalid merely becausecertain assets are not transferred by the seller as they would cause inconvenience ortrouble to the purchasing party - NO: HC

2016-TIOL-2957-HC-RAJ-IT

CIT Vs Shri Ram Niwas Dham Trust (Dated: April 13, 2016)

Whether depreciation of assets owned by an institution is entitled for deduction, whilecomputing income of a charitable institution/trust - YES: HC

2016-TIOL-2956-HC-PATNA-IT

Lal Bahadur Singh Vs UoI (Dated: November 23, 2016)

Whether the decision of Settlement Commission can be interfered with by the HC,when there is nether any grave procedural defect nor absence of nexus between thereasons given and the decision taken by the Settlement Commission - NO: HC

Whether mere declaration passed by Settlement Commission in order u/s 245D(2C) totreat the application filed by assessee as not invalid, can be treated as the finalirrevocable finding of Commission - NO: HC

Whether when the assessees has filed their returns on mercantile basis, it is not opento them to approach the Settlement Commission on the basis of a cash system ofaccounting - YES: HC

Whether an assessee can plead that the I-T Department or the Settlement Commissionshould only be concerned with the income tax to be collected on the income disclosedand not the nature of the transactions even if they amounted to a criminal act - NO:HC

Whether the applicant before the Settlement Commission can choose to evade therequirement of disclosing the manner in which the income has been derived - NO: HC

Whether it is open to the Settlement Commission to reject the applications filed forsettlement, on basic ground of non-fulfillment of conditional requirements u/s 245C -YES: HC


PR CIT Vs Super Malls Pvt Ltd (Dated: November 22, 2016)

Whether too literal interpretation of an word while construing the satisfaction note, canbe a ground for reversal of an order based on undisputed facts found during searchand seizure operations by AO - NO:HC



CIT Vs Meher Rusi Nusserwanji Surty (Dated: November 24, 2016)

Whether revenue's can retreat from its accepted view that expenditure incurred onmaking the house habitable is an investment in purchase of a house, only if thatpayment was made during the specified period as per Section 54F, in absence of anychange in facts or law till date - NO:HC


CIT Vs Grasim Industries Ltd (Dated: November 22, 2016)

Whether conduct of revenue in respect of disallowance of royalty and interest underSection 43B of the Act for previous years AYs can bar it from taking a different view inabsence of any change in the facts or law the AY in hand - NO:HC

Whether revenue could change its stand taken previously on same issue for the AY inhand without there being any change in the facts or law. - NO:HC


Vijay Kumar Vs ITO (Dated: December 2, 2016)

Whether when the ITAT has passed an order without giving reasons in support thereofand has set aside CIT's holding merely on the basis of presumption, such an orderdeserves to be set aside - YES: HC


Keki Bomi Dadiseth Vs ACIT (Dated: December 1, 2016)

Whether when an order has been passed against the assessee without even remotelyreferring to objections raised by him, such an order cannot be considered as a validorder - YES: HC


CIT Vs Greenfield Hotels & Estates Pvt Ltd (Dated: October 24, 2016)

Whether when Revenue has accepted the decision of the Court on an issue of law andnot challenged it in appeal then can a subsequent decision following the earlierdecision be challenged - NO: HC


PR CIT Vs Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd (Dated: November 4, 2016)

Whether information received by AO after completion of assessment which is out of theexisting record, is mandated for exercising power u/s 147 r/w/s 148 - YES: HC



Muninaga Reddy Vs ACIT (Dated: November 23, 2016)

Whether application for condonation of delay of 543 days can be allowed by court onthe ground of misunderstanding of a common order for two AY of partly allowing theappeal, when relief was secured for one AY by appeal from that common order - NO:HC


CIT Vs Sunil Mantri Trinity Projects Pvt Ltd (Dated: November 29, 2016)

Whether loan advanced to a borrower amounts to deemed dividend liable to tax on endof the lending company, when it was confirmed that borrower was not a registeredshareholder in the lending company at the time of advancement of loan - NO: HC


M Visvesvaraya Industrial Research And Development Centre Vs CIT (Dated:November 29, 2016)

Whether the amount appropriated towards the Sinking Funds was a part of the rentreceived and was in the nature of a revenue receipt - YES: HC


PR CIT Vs Karnataka Journalists Co-Operative Society Ltd (Dated: November16, 2016)

Whether interest income of society providing credit facilities to its members will qualifyfor exemption under section 80P of the act, when the assessee is not a co-operativebank as per banking regulation act- YES:HC


CIT Vs The Nilgiris Co-Operative Marketing Society Ltd (Dated: November 2,2016)

Whether a Co-operative Credit society engaged in selling agricultural produce of itsmembers, is eligible for the benefit of section 80P in respect of the interest receivedfrom its members - YES: HC



CIT Vs Nagarbail Salt Owners Co-Operative Society Ltd (Dated: November 19,2016)

Whether amount transferred to 'Distribution Pool Fund Account' can be taxed in thehands of Society, if the principal object of Society is to 'manufacture salt on co-operative basis' and its cumulative income is not more than the commission earned onmanufacture & sale of salt, interest on loans advanced to members and deposits withthe Bank – No: ITAT


Samsung India Electronics Pvt Ltd Vs State Of Up (Dated: August 1, 2016)

Whether issuance of notice for reassessment based on findiings of tribunal which werenot required for disposal of appeal falls beyond the scope of section 150 and 153 of theact - YES: HC


CIT Vs Sdb Infrastructure Pvt Ltd (Dated: November 11, 2016)

Whether CBDT Circular issued in order to ease the hardship faced by project exporters,who have executed projects in Iraq, will have application over the RBI Bond, if the

Circular does not refer to any particular Bond - Yes: HC

Whether claim of bad debts is allowable, where the the amount sought to be writtenoff represents money lent in the ordinary course of business of banking or moneylending carried on by the assessee – Yes: HC

Whether excess amount received by the assessee consequent to exchange gain, is acapital receipt where the project receivables remained blocked for a long time andthere was no chance of its recovery – Yes: HC


PR CIT Vs Snowtex Investment Ltd (Dated: November 22, 2016)

Whether income arising out of trading in derivatives, is a business income and doesnot fall within the purview of section 73 – YES: HC

HIGH COURT RULING Sagun Foundry Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (D ated ......HIGH COURT RULING...

Documents

Transcript of HIGH COURT RULING Sagun Foundry Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (D ated ......HIGH COURT RULING...