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. 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.)