Digest Of Imp Case Laws + Imp Verdicts Of Supreme Court And High Courts

 

Dear Subscriber,

Monthly (November 2014) + Consolidated (Jan to November 2014) Digest Of Imp Case Laws

The monthly digest of important case laws for the month of November 2014 and the consolidated digest for the period from January to November 2014 are available for download. In addition, the consolidated digest for the period from January 2013 to December 2013 as well as the consolidated digest for the period from January 2012 to December 2012 are also available for download.

Premier Breweries Ltd vs. CIT (Supreme Court)

S. 37(1): principles for deduction of business expenditure reiterated

The question that was posed by the High Court was whether acceptance of the agreements, affidavits and proof of payment would debar the assessing authority to go into the question whether the expenses claimed would still be allowable under Section 37 of the Act. This is a question which the High Court held was required to be answered in the facts of each case in the light of the decision of this Court in Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 1967 (63) ITR 57 and Lachminarayan Madan Lal vs. Commissioner of Income Tax West Bengal 1972 (86) ITR 439

CIT vs. M/s S. M. Construction (Bombay High Court)

S. 271(1)(c): Law laid down in Zoom Comm 327 ITR 510 (Del) does not apply if claim of assessee is bona fide and not in defiance of the law

The decision of the Delhi High Court in Zoom Communication P. Ltd. 327 ITR 510 (Del) is not applicable in the present facts for the reason that in this case, the stand taken by the assessee cannot be said to be in defiance of law and thus not bonafide

CIT vs. Muzafar Nagar Development Authority (Allahabad High Court – Full Bench)

S. 12AA: Non disposal of an application for registration before the expiry of six months as provided u/s 12AA (2) would not result in deemed grant of registration. Assessee will have to file a Writ to compel CIT to consider application

Providing that an application should be disposed of within a period of six months is distinct from stipulating the consequence of a failure to do so. Laying down a consequence that an application would be deemed to be granted upon the expiry of six months can only be by way of a legislative fiction or a deeming definition which the Court, in its interpretative capacity, cannot create. That would be to rewrite the law and to introduce a provision which advisedly the legislature has not adopted

Regards,

 

Editor,

 

itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Eminent Tax Expert Judge Appointed President Of The ITAT