Merely because liability was barred by time, it did not cease to be a debt and, thus where assessee had many creditors whose payments were outstanding for more than three years and some transactions were eight to nine years old, AO erred in treating amount due to creditors as assessee’s income and making addition u/s 41(1).
Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Batliboi Environmental Engineering Ltd. – [2022] 141 taxmann.com 245 (Bombay).
Sum payable to party allowable as bad debt only if it was lent in ordinary course of money lending business.
PCIT v. Khyati Realtors (P.) Ltd. – [2022] 141 taxmann.com 461 (SC).
Benami Act – Section 3 r/w/s 2(a) and Section 5 of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988, being disproportionately harsh, were unconstitutional from their inception. No confiscation of prosecution in respect of Benami Property Transactions entered into prior to 25-10-2016: SC LB.
UOI Vs. Ganpati Dealers Pvt. Ltd., 2022-TIOL-81-SC-BENAMI-LB.
KSEB is not liable to MAT; Tax collected by KSEB as agent of Kerala Government cannot be disallowed u/s 43B.
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v. Kerala State Electricity Board – [2022] 141 taxmann.com 341 (SC).
Prior-period Expenditure – Where bills for prior-period expenditure incurred by assessee were received during relevant year, liability towards said expenditure has crystallised during year and, thus, such prior period expenditure was to be allowed u/s 37(I) during the year.
ACIT v. National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India – [2022] 141 taxmann.com 108 (Delhi-Trib.).
Section 260A – Even in transfer of case u/s 127, appeal against ITATs decision shall lie to the HC in whose jurisdiction on the AO who passed the assessment order is situated.
Principal Commissioner of Income-tax – I, Chandigarh v. ABC Paper Ltd. – [2022] 141 taxmann.com 332 (SC).