This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Expenditure related to stock-in-trade to be allowed as revenue expenditure. [S. 2(14)(i)]

ACIT v. Cyrus Investments Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 91 ITR 49 (SN) (Mum.) (Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Ad hoc basis-Expenses relating to Telephone, Mobile, Vehicle Running and maintenance and depreciation on car-Lump sum disallowance of Rs. 20,000 purely on an ad hoc basis-Not sustainable.

Anil Kumar Garg v. ITO (2021) 91 ITR 68 (SN) (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Ad-hoc disallowance of 20 percent of expenses-Not sustainable.

Kushal Virendra Tandon v. CIT (2021) 91 ITR 610 / (2022) 215 TTJ 630 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Conversion of debentures in to equity shares-Documents and stamp charges on conversion-Capital expenditure-Provision of section 35D is not applicable allowance of expenditure incurred after commencement of business. [S. 35D]

Sacmi Engineering India (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 207 DTR 293/(2022) 215 TTJ 1029 (Ahd.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue expenditure-Tenancy agreement-Stamp duty and registration charges-Allowable as revenue expenditure.

Hickson & Dadajee (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2021) 201 DTR 75 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue expenditure-Expenditure incurred on buy back of shares-Allowable as revenue expenditure.

Dy. CIT v. Supreme Industries Ltd. (2021) 197 DTR 241 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Designing and development expenses-Capital or revenue-Held to be capital expenditure-Directed to allow the depreciation-R&D expenditure-Failure to produce evidence not allowed-Directed the AO to allow depreciation-Reassessment order passed beyond four years-Order was quashed. [S. 32, 35(1)(iv), 147, 148]

Tata Advanced Materials Ltd. v. DCIT / (2021) 209 TTJ 242 / 197 DTR 97 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Arrears of wages on the basis of 6th Pay Commission-Quantified and paid latter years-Allowable as deduction. [S. 40(a)(ia),145]

ACIT v. Chennai Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. (2021) 209 TTJ 652 / 198 DTR 61 (Chennai)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Weighted deduction-R&D facility-Allowable as revenue expenditure-Interest on borrowed amount-Matter remanded-Exempt income-While computing disallowance under section 14A only average value of such investment from which yielded exempt income is to be considered. [S. 14A, 35(2AB), 36(1)(iii), R. 8D(2)(iii)]

Biological E Ltd. v. DCIT (2021) 91 ITR 201 / (2022) 192 ITD 475 (Hyd.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Ad-hoc disallowance-Not pointed out any specific defect-Not justified in making 20 percent ad-hoc disallowance. [S. 143(3)]

ITO v. Guru Homes (2021) 214 TTJ 17 (UR) (Chennai)(Trib.)