Section 90A of the Income Tax Act
The decision most relied on for Section 90A is CIT v. Eli Lilly & Co.(India) Pvt. Ltd. (178 Taxmann 505), cited in 172 of the 194 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.
Leading authorities on Section 90A
Procedural law serves as an aid to justice, not an obstruction, and should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory; it is subservient to substantive justice.
Transaction charges paid to a stock exchange are for providing a facility and not fees for technical services, thus no tax deduction is required under Section 194J.
An assessee's claim for Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) cannot be rejected merely because Form 67 was filed after the due date under section 139(1), provided it is filed before the completion of assessment proceedings.
The filing of an audit report along with the return of income is directory and not mandatory, meaning non-compliance does not automatically invalidate the return.
When a new statutory provision is substituted for an existing one, the legislative intent is typically that the old provision is deemed deleted and does not remain in force unless there is a clear intention to keep it alive.
The Supreme Court declined to stay assessment proceedings, even when there was divergence of opinion among High Courts and reservations about the correctness of prior judgments concerning the validity of orders under Section 142(2A) and extended limitation under Section 153(3).
