Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Lear Automotive India P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (2023)105 ITR 4 (SN)(Pune)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Joint Venture-Payment towards engineering and development cost each year dependent upon volume of production. Intellectual property rights remaining with companies, Payment not resulting in intangible asset capable of capitalization, said payment for use of technology revenue in nature.

Ashish Life Science P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (2023)103 ITR 557 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Assessee carrying on business in veterinary pharmaceuticals-Products registration expenses-Allowable as revenue expenditure:

Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages P. Ltd v. Dy. CIT (2023) 103 ITR 67 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business Expenditure-Capital or revenue-Non-Compete fee-In the first year of payment, proportionate deduction disallowed holding the same as capital expenditure-Rule of consistency is to be followed.

Cherry Hill Interiors P. Ltd. v. Add. CIT [2023] 105 ITR 34 (Delhi)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Club membership fees-Club membership used by representatives of assessee for entertaining present and prospective customers-Commercial expediency-Allowable expenditure.

Dy. CIT v. H. K. Ispat P. Ltd. (2023) 103 ITR 12 (SN)(Ahd) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expendirure-Amortisation of preliminary expenses-Capital or revenue expenditure-Expenditure in connection with increase in authorised capital-Not allowed as revenue expenditure-Assessee cannot capitalise it and claim depreciation thereon-Mercantile system of accounting-Interest to be taxed on accrual basis. [S. 32, 35D, 37(1), 145]

Nuvama Wealth and Investment Ltd. v ACIT [2023] 201 ITD 242 (Hyd)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure- Equity Stock Option Plan-ESOP expenses-Failure to consider the submissions-Matter remanded.[S. 17(2)(vi(c),192]

Lokhandwala Kataria Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (2023)104 ITR 84 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Insurance premium of director paid by Company-Not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business-Not allowable as deduction-Bogus purcahses-Entire bogus purchase cannot be added-Addition restricted to 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases.-Delay of 177 days was condoned. [S. 133(6), 254(1)]

Dinesh Devraj Ranka v. Addl. CIT [2023] 200 ITD 731 (Bang)(Trib.)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Commercial expediency-Professional and consultancy charges-Matter remanded.

Lokhandwala Kataria Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (2023)104 ITR 84 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Insurance premium of director paid by Company-Not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business-Not allowable as deduction-Bogus purchases-Entire bogus purchase cannot be added-Addition restricted to 12.5% of alleged bogus purchases.-Delay of 177 days was condoned. [S. 133(6), 254(1)]

Addl. CIT v. Amway India Enterprises (P) Ltd. (Delhi) 201 ITD 229(Delhi)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Reimbursement of service tax-Commercial expediency —Allowable as revenue expenditure.