Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


CIT v. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Ltd.[2024] 165 taxmann.com 227 (Bom)(HC)

S. 40A(9) : Expenses or payments not deductible-Bonus to employees-Business expenditure-Contribution to employees welfare trust-Community services-Payments under a Memorandum of Settlement with the trade union-Expenditure not covered by Section 30 to Section 36, and expenditure made for purposes of business shall be allowed as business expenditure. [S. 37(1), 30 to 36]

Inditrade Capital Ltd. v. CIT (2024) 301 Taxman 638 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Professional and consultancy charges-Enduring nature, expenditure is capital in nature-Order of Tribunal is affirmed.[S.260A]

PCIT v. Canara Housing Development Company (2024) 301 Taxman 377 (Karn)(HC) Editorial : Canara Housing Development Company v. JCIT (2017) 165 ITD 76 (Bang)(Trib) is reversed

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Compensation-Breach of contract-Real estate and land development-Agreement entered into by managing partner in his individual capacity-Terms and Conditions of the agreement relevant-Arbitral Award-Not allowable as business expenditure. [S. 145, 260A, Indian Partnership Act, 1932, S.14]

CIT v. State of Hyderabad (No. 1) [2024] 469 ITR 316 (Telangana)(HC)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Banking business –Capital or revenue-Stock in trade-Broken period interest paid on the purchase of securities is revenue expenditure since securities constitute stock-in-trade. [S. 145, 260A]

PCIT v. Galaxy Surfactants Ltd. (2024) 301 Taxman 173 (Bom)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Foreign Exchange losses towards loan in nature of external commercial borrowings for acquisition of assets from outside India and from within India-The Tribunal failed to look at substance of expenditure and erroneously interpreted the provisions of Section 43A-Matter remanded back to the Tribunal for an effective adjudication of specific issue.[S.43A, 254(1), 260A]

PCIT v. Tata Chemical Ltd (No. 1) [2024] 469 ITR 250 / 162 taxmann.com 11 (Bom)(HC)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) directed to decide the issue on disallowance of deduction claimed on debenture resumption within 3 months as matter pertains to year 1997-98-Revenue has accepted the finding of Tribunal in assessee’s own case in previous years regarding disallowance of expenses on entertainment expenditure and expenses related to school the same question of law cannot be raised in a subsequent year. [S. 40A (9), S. 246A, 260A].

DIT v. ANZ Grindlays Bank (2024) 301 Taxman 599 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Expenses for inviting NRIs to open deposits in its Indian branches-Allowable as business expenditure. [S.260A]

Inditrade Capital Ltd. v. CIT (2024) 301 Taxman 638 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 36(1)(va) : Any sum received from employees-Payment was made after due date prescribed under respective Acts-Order of Tribunal disallowing the expenses is affirmed. [S. 260A]

Inditrade Capital Ltd. v. CIT (2024) 301 Taxman 638 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 35D : Amortisation of preliminary expenses-Initial public offer of shares expenses-Direct expenses incurred in connection with initial public offer of shares, it could not claim deduction of indirect expenses incurred in connection with same object as revenue expenses. [S. 37(1)]

Y. S. & Co-owners v. ITO [2024] 301 Taxman 647 (P& H)(HC)

S. 32 : Depreciation-Godowns-Plinths-plinth constructed could not be treated as building-Not entitle to depreciation-Order of Tribunal is affirmed. [S. 22, 26, 260A]