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)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Payment of advisory fee to a foreign company-Not fees for technical services-Not liable to deduct tax at source-DTAA-India-Singapore. [S. 9(1)(vii), 195, Art. 12]
ITO (IT) v. Hartaj Sewa Singh. (2025) 211 ITD 179 (Kol) (Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Finance lease rental-Providing remote infrastructure management, remote helpdesk, remote network monitoring services and other services for foreign customers-Allowable as business expenditure.
DCIT v. NTT Global Data Centres Cloud Infrastructure India (P.) Ltd. (2025) 211 ITD 640 (Mum) (Trib.)
S.37(1): Business expenditure-Service tax payment-Corporate agency agreement-Allowable as deduction.
Axis Bank Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 211 ITD 650 /235 TTJ 209 (Ahd) (Trib.)
S.37(1): Business expenditure-Expenditure incurred on sale of commercial space-Payment was made by cheque-Order of CIT(A) deleting the addition is affirmed.
ACIT v. Pavani Structurals (P.) Ltd. (2025) 211 ITD 415 (Hyd) (Trib.)
S.37(1): Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Retainership fees to two foreign agents for marketing and business development-Allowable as revenue expenditure.
JIL Information Technology Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 211 ITD 277 (Lucknow) (Trib.)
S.37(1): Business expenditure-Remuneration paid to partner-Maintenance of account-Allowable as deduction. [S. 153A]
Rameshchandra Balachand. v. JCIT (OSD) (2025) 211 ITD 24 (Mum) (Trib.)
S.37(1): Business expenditure-Fees for technical services to a foreign company for selection of suitable technical staff for project, review of contractual documents, etc-Allowable as business expenditure.
DCIT v. Gulermak TPL Joint Venture. (2025) 211 ITD 349 (Mum) (Trib.)
S.37(1): Business expenditure-License fee-Commercial exploitation of music albums-Deferred revenue expenditure to be amortized over six-year period and not as prior period expenses-Matter remanded.
Aalap Digital Music (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2025) 211 ITD 284 (Delhi) (Trib.)
S.37(1): Business expenditure-Broken period interest, i.e., interest accrued between last coupon date and date of purchase of government securities-Allowable as business expenditure.
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 211 ITD 608 (Mum) (Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Discount on issuance of ESOPs is an allowable business expenditure.
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 211 ITD 608 (Mum) (Trib.)