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-Builder-Brokerage and commission-Held to be allowable as revenue expenditure.

PCIT v. DLF Home Development Ltd. (2020) 114 taxmann.com 97 (Delhi) (HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. DLF Home Development Ltd. (2020) 270 Taxman 97 (SC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Compensation paid towards vacating the premises treating it as revenue expenditure-Question of law admitted. [S.260A].

CIT v. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. (2020) 114 taxmann.com 275 (Bom.) (HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, CIT v. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd (2020) 270 Taxman 99 (SC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Aimed at improving practices for better fertility amongst milk animal-Allowable as business expenditure.

PCIT v. Gujarat Co. Op. Milk Marketing Federation Ltd (2020) 113 taxmann.com 84 (Guj.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Gujarat Co. Op. Milk Marketing Federation Ltd. (2020) 269 Taxman 41 (SC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Foreign exchange fluctuation loss-Loan to subsidiary-Allowable as business expenditure. [S. 28(i)]

PCIT v. Albasta Wholesale Services Ltd. (2020) 117 taxmann.com 165 (Delhi)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Albasta Wholesale Services Ltd. (2020) 272 Taxman 105 (SC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Hotel business-Lessee-Renovation expenses-Held to be revenue expenditure.

CIT v. New Kenilworth Hotel (P.) Ltd (2020) 117 taxmann.com 109 (Cal.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect, CIT v. New Kenilworth Hotel (P.) Ltd (2020) 272 Taxman 108 (SC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Ex gratia payment to employees is held to be allowable as deduction on account of commercial expediency.

CIT v. New India Co. Op. Bank Ltd. (2020) 117 taxmann.com 127 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect, CIT v. New India Co. Op. Bank Ltd. (2020) 272 Taxman 435 (SC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Paid by account payee cheque-Held to be allowable though the purchaser has informed that no agent was involved in the contract.

CIT v. Genus Overseas Electronics (2020) 117 taxmann.com 103 (Raj.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed due to low tax effect,, CIT v.. Genus Overseas Electronics (2020) 272 Taxman 22 (SC)

S. 36(1)(iii) : Interest on borrowed capital-Loan given to sister concern-Without charging interest-Disallowance of interest was held to be not valid.

PCIT v. E City Investments and Holdings Company (P.) Ltd. (2020) 117 taxmann.com 123 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. E City Investments And Holdings Company (P.) Ltd. (2020) 272 Taxman 90 (SC)

S. 32 : Depreciation-Unabsorbed depreciation-Amalgamation-Unabsorbed depreciation of amalgamating company allowed to be set off against income of amalgamated company for assessment year 2008-09 i.e. beyond period of eight years [S.32].

PCIT v. Supreme Petrochem Ltd. (2020) 115 taxmann.com 221 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, PCIT v. Supreme Petrochem Ltd. (2020) 275 Taxman 8 (SC)

S. 32 : Depreciation-Unabsorbed depreciation-Carry forward and set off of-Unabsorbed depreciation loss for assessment year 1995-96 to be carried forward and set off against future profits beyond eight years holding that amendment by Finance Act, 2001 and CBDT Circular No. 14/2001 was applicable retrospectively. [S. 32 (2), 72]

CIT v. Bhima Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. (2020) 121 taxmann.com 6 (Bom.)(HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, CIT v. Bhima Sahakari Karkhana Ltd. (2020) 275 Taxman 390 (SC)