Section 115QA of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 115QA is CIT v. Veekay Lal Investments Co. Pvt. Ltd. (249 ITR 597), cited in 99 of the 29 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 115QA

CIT v. Veekay Lal Investments Co. Pvt. Ltd.
249 ITR 597 · 2001 · High Court
99
citing judgments

Book profits under Section 115JB must include income by way of capital gains, similar to how total income is calculated under Section 45.

Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT
132 ITR 559 · 1981 · Supreme Court
39
citing judgments

A reserve set apart to meet a known liability is not a reserve for the purposes of accounting, but rather a provision for a liability. This means it cannot be considered a reserve for tax purposes.

Sunrise Education Trust v. ITO(E)
92 Taxmann.com 74 · 2018 · High Court
20
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings are invalid if initiated based on factually incorrect reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, such as the erroneous belief that the assessee never filed a return. Such incorrect premises vitiate the Assessing Officer's jurisdiction.

Pentamedia Graphics Ltd. v. ITO
236 CTR 204 · 2011 · High Court
17
citing judgments

Once a scheme of arrangement is approved by a court and is within the bounds of the law, it is binding on tax authorities.

CIT v. G Narasimhan
236 ITR 327 · 1999 · Supreme Court
15
citing judgments

Accumulated profits for the purpose of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) are to be computed in accordance with the Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS) rather than opening balances as per Indian GAAP. This case also touches upon the definition of 'transfer' under section 2(47).

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bayer Vapi (P.) Ltd.
106 Taxmann.com 395 · 2019 · High Court
11
citing judgments

Buyback of its own shares by a company is neither capital expenditure nor does it result in enduring benefits to the company. The consideration of non-deduction of TDS, which was evident from Form 3CD and not considered in the original assessment order, is not a change of opinion for reopening.

CIT v. Selan Exploration Technology Ltd.
188 Taxmann 1 · 2010 · High Court
11
citing judgments

Expenses incurred for buyback of shares are an allowable business expense for the purpose of computation of income. Such expenditure is not in the nature of capital expenditure and is not required to be capitalised.

100 ITD 173. (g) M/s. Balaram Manmani v. Asstt. CIT (Lucknow)
7 SOT 164 · 2006 · ITAT
10
citing judgments

Section 115JB(1) of the Income Tax Act, read with Explanation 1(i), governs the computation of book profits for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes.

Vora Financial Services (P) Ltd. v. ACIT
96 Taxmann.com 88 · 2018 · ITAT
10
citing judgments

Shares bought back by a company are not considered the property of the assessee for the purpose of Section 56(2)(viia), as a company cannot hold its own shares as property.

PCIT v. Merck Ltd.
120 Taxmann.com 361 · 2020 · High Court
7
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 115QA