Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Altisource Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 99 ITR 647 (Bang) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or Revenue Expenditure-Payment for acquisition of application software-Revenue expenditure.

Allen Career Institute v. JCIT (2022) 99 ITR 269 (Jaipur) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Financial assistance to meritorious students-Not contingent-Allowable as deduction-Capital or revenue-Expenditure for new electricity connection and Meter cost-Internet networking expenses-Payment to Municipality for name transfer fee-allowable as revenue expenditure-Expenses incurred for extension of height of existing boundary wall-Capital expenditure-Fines and penalties-Expenses for regularisation of construction of old building-Penalty imposed by Urban Improvement Trust on account of unauthorised construction-Not allowable as business expenditure.[S. 145]

Karnataka State Beverages Corporation Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 99 ITR 325 (Bang) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Ex gratia payment-Deduction should be allowed although liability may have to be quantified and discharged at future date-Matter remanded. [S. 145]

Mahamedha Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 99 ITR 669 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Expenditure is not substantiated with valid vouchers-Disallowance is affirmed.

ACIT v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd (As successor in business of eralt while, Vysya Bank Ltd (2022) 215 TTJ 409 /210 DTR 81 (Bang)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Application software-Net working with 125 branches-Allowable as revenue expenditure.

ACIT v. A.M. Ratnam (2022) 215 TTJ 665 / 210 DTR 1 (Chennai)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Post-production expenses of feature film-Producer and distributor-Allowable as business expenditure-Rule 9A or Rule 9B is not applicable. Reassessment on change of opinion is bad in law-Resale of set material-Estimated at 5 per cent of total cost incurred on such set materials. [S. 143(3), 147, 148 Rule, 9A, 9B]

Dy. CIT v. Manaksia Steels Ltd. (2022)99 ITR 12 (SN)(Kol) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Entertainment expenses Disallowance was restricted to 10%-Held to be proper-Transfer pricing adjustment deleted by the CIT(A) was affirmed [S. 92C]

Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 220 TTJ 409 (Pune) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Finance lease-Reclassified and claimed as deduction-Absence of details not allowed as deduction.

Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 220 TTJ 409 (Pune) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Taxes paid abroad-Taxes for which no benefit of foreign tax credit has been allowed-Allowable as deduction. [S. 40(a)(ii), 90, 91]

ACIT v. Indus Health Plus (P) Ltd. (2022) 220 TTJ 764 (Pune)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Medical check-up provision for charges payable to hospitals-Matter remanded for verification-Escrow Disbursement Provision for incentive payable to distributors-The deduction for the incentive commission is to be allowed the package was sold as reduced by the payments made in respect of the on actual payment basis in the concerned year irrespective of the year in which packages sold in the earlier years. [S. 145]