Category: Tax Laws

Archive for the ‘Tax Laws’ Category


ITO v. West Bengal Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. (2018) 61 ITR 728 (Kol) (Trib)

S.37(1): Business expenditure — Contribution to staff welfare fund was held to be allowable expenditure.

DCIT v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. (2018) 168 ITD 529 (Mum) (Trib.)

S.37(1): Business expenditure -Discount on shares allotted by assessee to its employees under ESOP scheme out of its share capital is an allowable deduction .

ACIT v. K.R. Kaviraj. (2018) 168 ITD 491 (Bang) (Trib.)

S.37(1): Business expenditure -Premium paid for Keyman Insurance was allowable in year in which premium was paid.

ACIT v. K.R. Kaviraj. (2018) 168 ITD 491 (Bang) (Trib.)

S.37(1): Business expenditure – Capital or revenue- Annual lease premium paid for acquiring mining rights on a land was capital expenditure.

ACIT v. Kiwifx Solutions. (2018) 61 ITR 780 (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure –Commission agents – Confirmation and tax was deducted at source- Disallowance on the basis of presumption was held to be not valid

CIT v. Modern Threads (I) Ltd. (2018) 400 ITR 381 (Raj) (HC) CIT v. Modern Syntex (2018) 400 ITR 381 (Raj) (HC)

S.37(1): Business expenditure — Capital or revenue-— Expenditure on issue of debentures was held to be allowable as revenue expenditure irrespective of nature of debenture.

CIT v. Jagdish Prasad Gupta. (2018) 400 ITR 583 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 37(1):Business expenditure —Accrual- Enhancement of Licence fee payable to Railways in the year in which payment was issued .

GKN Driveline India Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 252 Taxman 297 / 169 DTR 360(Delhi)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Capital or revenue -Non compete fee was held to be capital in nature

CIT v. Ing Investment Management (India) P. Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 405 (Bom) (HC)

S. 37(1):Business expenditure — Expenditure in excess of 6 Per cent. of initial issue expenses of asset management company was held to be deductible. Expenditure relating to Information Technology Infrastructure was also held to be allowable . [Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 R. 52 ]

Oriental Bank of Commerce v. A CIT (2018) 401 ITR 65/ 162 DTR 257 /254 Taxman 197/ 304 CTR 363 (Delhi) (HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure -Interest on overdue deposit on overdue deposits is ascertained liability hence allowable as deduction .