S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Building contractor-Capitalised the expenditure-Not disallowable.[S. 30 to 38, 143(1)(a), 194C]
Raghav Agritech. v. ITO (2025) 215 ITD 647 (Nagpur) (Trib.)S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Building contractor-Capitalised the expenditure-Not disallowable.[S. 30 to 38, 143(1)(a), 194C]
Raghav Agritech. v. ITO (2025) 215 ITD 647 (Nagpur) (Trib.)S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Job work-Furnished Form 16A-Addition was deleted.[Form No 26AS]
R Y Midas Metacast (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2025) 215 ITD 305 (Ahd) (Trib.)S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Commission payment outside India-: Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Commission paid to non-residents for services rendered outside India is not taxable in India; hence, the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS under S. 195. [S. 9(1)(i), 195]
United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2025) 123 ITR 291 (Chennai)(Trib.)S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Reinsurance premium ceded to non-resident reinsurers (NRRs) is not taxable in India under the Income Tax Act or the applicable DTAA; therefore, disallowance under S. 40(a)(i) for non-deduction of TDS under S. 195 does not arise. [S.195]
United India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2025) 123 ITR 291 (Chennai)(Trib.)S. 40(a)(i): Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Business profits-Canvassing orders and facilitating export transactions-Business income accruing outside India-Not liable to deduct tax at source-No disallowance can be made.[S.9(1)(i), 195, Article 7 of the OECD Model Convention]
Foods and Inns Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 215 ITD 266 (Mum) (Trib.)S.37(1): Business expenditure-Commission-Allowable as deduction.
R Y Midas Metacast (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2025) 215 ITD 305 (Ahd) (Trib.)S.37(1): Business expenditure-Marketing support expenses-Director’s remuneration-Allowable as business expenditure.
DCIT v. Anand NVH Products (P.) Ltd. (2025) 215 ITD 98 (Delhi) (Trib.)S. 36(1)(va): Any sum received from employees-Delayed employees’ PF/ESI contributions on ground that figures in Form 3CD included both employer’s and employees’ portions-Matter was remanded to the file of CIT(A) to verify actual delay, segregate employer’s and employees’ contributions, and restrict disallowance only to employees’ share deposited after statutory due dates.[S.43B, 143(1)]
Atamjeet Singh Sandhu. v. ITO (2025) 215 ITD 181 (Chd) (Trib.)S. 36(1)(iii): Interest on borrowed capital-Advances to group concerns at lower interest-No disallowance if assessee’s own funds exceed interest-free advances-Nexus established between borrowings and business use-Ad hoc disallowance based on average rate unjustified-Addition is deleted. [S. 40A(2)(b)]
Milestone Merchandise P. Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 122 ITR 186 (Mum)(Trib.)S. 36(1)(iii): Interest on borrowed capital-Commercial expediency-Disallowance is deleted.[S.37(1)]
Ravindra Madanlal Khandelwal v. Dy. CIT [2024] 169 taxmann.com 457/ (2025) 123 ITR 660/ 234 TTJ 57(UO) (Nagpur)(Trib.)