| Section 2(14) |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Partnership interest assigned in an LLP constitutes a capital asset and transfer; matter remanded for proper valuation to compute actual capital gain or loss. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 2(14) |
Laxminarayan v. Income-tax Officer |
The 8 km municipal boundary limit for agricultural land must be determined as per the date of notification (06-01-1994) rather than the date of sale; land held not to be a capital asset, deleting Section 50C addition. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 2(15) |
Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) v. Bhavnagar Mandap Contractors Association |
A trade promotion body coordinating mandap contractors’ business without engaging in trade, commerce, or business falls within “advancement of any other object of general public utility”; rejection of Section 12AA registration held unjustified. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 4 |
Usha Martin Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax |
Receipts generated from the sale of carbon credits are to be treated as capital receipts. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 12A |
Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) v. Bhavnagar Mandap Contractors Association |
Rule 17A does not require prior registration with the Charity Commissioner; documentary evidence proving creation and objects suffices for Section 12AA registration. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 12A |
Aatma Prakash Mental Health Foundation v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) |
Application remanded by ITAT remaining undecided for over 12 years exceeds Section 153 time limits and is deemed allowed under the old regime, requiring examination of current application under present law. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 12A / 12AB / 80G |
Aatma Prakash Mental Health Foundation v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) |
Registration/approval applications rejected solely for non-compliance with notices without adjudication on merits or effective hearing must be restored for fresh consideration. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 12AB |
Aatma Prakash Mental Health Foundation v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) |
Rejection of registration/approval application solely due to selecting an incorrect clause or sub-clause in the online form is unsustainable; assessee must be allowed to rectify. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 12AB |
Aatma Prakash Mental Health Foundation v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) |
CIT(E) possesses the power to condone delay in filing Form 10AB and must adjudicate the registration application on merits after condonation. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 12AB |
Aatma Prakash Mental Health Foundation v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) |
Application rejected alleging expenditures were unrelated to trust objects without granting prior opportunity to explain requires remand for proper hearing. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 12AB |
Bai Hirabai Manchersha Gilder Charity Trust v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) |
Registration renewal cannot be rejected merely for failure to produce an old certificate when secondary evidence proves prior registration and objects are undisputed. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 12AB |
Bai Hirabai Manchersha Gilder Charity Trust v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) |
Valid registration held in Form 10AC cannot be treated as invalid during renewal without following statutory cancellation procedures and providing a hearing. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 14A |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
No interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) is warranted where own interest-free funds are sufficient; administrative expense disallowance restricted to 0.5% after giving credit for suo motu disallowance. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 14A |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Expenditure disallowed under Section 14A cannot be added back while computing book profit under Section 115JB via Explanation 1 clause (f). |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 36(1)(iii) |
ACIT v. Giraffe Developers (P.) Ltd. |
Post-completion interest incurred by a real estate developer on unsold flats held as inventory is allowable as business expenditure in the year Section 40(a)(ia) TDS conditions are fulfilled. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 36(1)(iii) |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Interest paid to a group company on delayed security deposits is allowable, following binding ITAT precedent in assessee’s own case for prior years. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 37(1) |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Software upgradation and support expenses are revenue in nature and allowable as business expenditure, following precedent. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 37(1) |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Consultancy fees paid cannot be disallowed as capital expenditure on grounds of enduring benefit when identical claims were allowed in earlier years. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 37(1) |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Management consultancy fees paid are allowable business deductions and cannot be disallowed under Section 35DD where previously allowed by ITAT. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 37(1) |
Usha Martin Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax |
Where assessee suo motu disallowed 20% of foreign travel expenses and offered it under Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT), no further disallowance by the AO is warranted. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 68 |
Galaxy Buildcon v. Income-tax Officer |
Unexplained source of capital introduced by partners into a firm must be examined in the hands of the individual partners, not added to the firm’s income. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 69 |
Laxminarayan v. Income-tax Officer |
Unexplained investment addition deleted where correct computation and explanations established the legitimate source of cash paid for agricultural land purchase. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 69A |
Mahendra Gumanmalji Lodha v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax |
Reopening assessment under Section 147 based on Investigation Wing reports without new tangible material constitutes an impermissible change of opinion and is quashed. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 80G |
Aatma Prakash Mental Health Foundation v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) |
Rejection of Section 80G approval alleging religious objects remanded to provide an opportunity to establish educational, welfare, and non-sectarian public benefit objects. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 80HHC / 80-IA |
Rati Enterprises v. Commissioner of Income-tax |
Section 80-IA(9) does not mandate reducing profits allowed under Section 80-IA(1) from business profits when computing deductions under Heading C of Chapter VI-A (such as Section 80HHC). |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 80-IA |
Usha Martin Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax |
State Electricity Board consumer tariff rate must be adopted as the market benchmark for computing Section 80-IA deduction on captive power generation, rejecting cost-plus markup. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 80-IB / 80-IE |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Interest income earned from staff advances and bank deposits is not derived from an industrial undertaking and is ineligible for deduction under Sections 80-IB/80-IE. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 92C |
Usha Martin Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax |
Corporate guarantee commission adjustment restricted to 0.5% in line with precedent. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 92C |
Usha Martin Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax |
Transfer pricing addition on interest rate for overseas bank loans restricted to the previously approved 9% benchmark. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 92C |
Indus Valley Partners (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Foreign AE qualifying as the least complex entity cannot be rejected as the tested party without identifying specific defects in CA-certified segmental financials. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 92C |
Indus Valley Partners (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Integrated transactions consisting of software sale and marketing support cannot be de-segregated to determine marketing ALP at nil. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 92C |
Indus Valley Partners (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Comparing assessee’s 6-month operating margins against 12-month comparable margins and using entity-level data over available segmental data invalidates TP additions. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 115JB |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Amortization of intangible assets in audited accounts for MAT cannot be disallowed over ownership disputes where covered by prior orders in assessee’s favour. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 115JB |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Inadvertent omission in return to exclude tax-free interest income exempt under Section 10(15) from book profit cannot be denied on technical grounds. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 115JB |
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Transfer to Debenture Redemption Reserve for meeting known debenture redemption obligations represents an ascertained liability and cannot be treated as a reserve under Section 115JB. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 115JB |
Indus Valley Partners (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
Transfer pricing adjustments made under normal provisions cannot be added to Section 115JB book profit unless covered under Explanation 1. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 170A |
Indus Valley Partners (India) (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax |
AO directed to verify modified return filed under Section 170A following NCLT merger approval and recompute total income accordingly. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 194-I |
Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS)-2 v. SS Group (P.) Ltd. |
External Development Charges (EDC) paid by a real estate builder to HUDA do not constitute rent and are not liable to TDS under Section 194-I. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 260A |
Smt. Vidhya Muralidharan v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax |
Inordinate delay of 2,415 days in filing appeal citing counsel’s ill-health and mother’s illness does not constitute sufficient cause for condonation. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 263 |
Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rajesh Kumar Gupta |
SLP dismissed; Section 263 revision order is unjustified where PCIT fails to establish that the assessment order was both erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 268A |
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Jayprakash B Barbhaya |
SLP dismissed; Revenue appeal with tax effect of ₹1.44 Crore (below ₹2 Crore monetary limit) is not maintainable, and prospective exceptions in later CBDT circulars cannot apply to prior appeals. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 271B |
Manish Pushkar Dayal Singhal v. Income-tax officer |
Bona fide belief regarding non-applicability of tax audit due to differing legal interpretations on GST inclusion in turnover constitutes reasonable cause to delete penalty. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 271DA |
Joint Commissioner of Income-tax Central Range v. Ganesh Agarwal |
Absence of a detailed show-cause notice does not invalidate penalty under Section 271DA if Section 274 notice was issued and reasonable opportunity was given. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 271DA |
Joint Commissioner of Income-tax Central Range v. Ganesh Agarwal |
For the purpose of Section 275(1)(c), Section 271DA penalty proceedings are initiated upon issuance of Section 274 notice by the Joint Commissioner, not on the AO’s proposal date. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 271DA |
Joint Commissioner of Income-tax Central Range v. Ganesh Agarwal |
Joint Commissioner must issue Section 274 notice within 6 months from the end of the month of receipt of the AO’s reference, failing which proceedings are time-barred. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
| Section 271DA |
Joint Commissioner of Income-tax Central Range v. Ganesh Agarwal |
Sections 271DA, 274, and 275 do not mandate prior recording of satisfaction or a detailed show-cause notice by the Joint Commissioner before initiation. |
Click Here |
Income-tax Act, 1961 |
