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-Money embezzled by director-CIT(A) accepted loss but denied deduction for want of details-AO to verify recovery and allow balance of loss.[S. 28(i)]

Wieden+Kennedy India Pvt. Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2023)101 ITR 63 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib)

S .37(1) : Business expenditure-Prior period expense-Reversal of income offered when finalising accounts for later years-Prior period income no to be taxed again-Matter remanded to avoid duplicity of additions.[S. 145]

Matrimony.Com Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (2023)101 ITR 253 (Chennai) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Provision for scheme not contingent-Made on scientific basis-Own orders in earlier years-No contrary findings-Addition to be deleted.

Havells India Ltd. v. ACIT (LTU) (2023)101 ITR 81 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Interest on foreign currency loan-Loss on fluctuation of rates-Foreign exchange gains offered to tax-loss arising of the same to also be allowed.[S. 28(i)]

Praxair India P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 101 ITR 640 (Bang.)(Trib.)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Debit of cash discount prior to crystalising during year and not in prior or subsequent year-Deduction allowable. [S. 145]

Ganesh Ginning Factory v.Asst. CIT(2023)101 ITR 90 (SN) (Ahd) (Trib) Gajanand Ginning and Pressing Pvt. Ltd v. ITO (2023)101 ITR 90 (SN) (Ahd) (Trib) Premjibhai Vallabhbhai Kukadiya v. ITO (2023)101 ITR 90 (SN) (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-No documents in support of claim of quantum of expenses-Disallowance sustained.

Asst. CIT v. Dhar Construction Co. (2023)101 ITR 49 (SN)(Gauhati) (Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Travel expenses-No evidence to support claim-Expense not allowable.

Saranya Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. v ITO (2023)101 ITR 60 (SN)(Chennai) (Trib)

S. 36(1)(vii) : Bad debt-Bad debt or part thereof-Sum received-Declared as income in subsequent year-Disallowance is not justified.[S. 36(2)]

Vijay Liladhar Mohmaya v ITO (2023)101 ITR 33 (SN) (Mum) (Trib)

S. 36(1)(iii) :Interest on borrowed capital-Interest free loans-no business transaction with parties-Notional interest computed at 0.88 % on average-Reasonable.

Saranya Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2023)101 ITR 60 (SN)(Chenni) (Trib)

S. 35D : Amortisation of preliminary expenses-Business expenditure-Payment to registrar of companies towards fees considered as preliminary expenses and 1/5th allowed in initial years-Cannot be disallowed in subsequent years.[S. 37(1)]

Vatika Hotels P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (2023)101 ITR 21 / 199 ITD 741(Delhi) (Trib)