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-Payments to contractors for packing, loading and unloading-Opportunity of cross examination is not given-Disallowance is deleted.[S. 153A]

ACIT v. Jindal Poly Films Ltd. (2024)114 ITR 72 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Software licence expenditure-Allowable as revenue expenditure.

ACIT v. First Advantage P. Ltd. (2024)114 ITR 45 (SN) (Mum)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital expenditure of intangible nature accounted as capital work-in-progress-Matter remanded for verification. [S. 32]

Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT (2024)114 ITR 546 (Ahd)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue–Share issue expenses-Transfer of funds from accumulated profit to share capital-Allowable as revenue expenditure.

Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT (2024)114 ITR 434 (Ahd)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Funds raised by issue of debentures-Allowable as deduction.

Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT (2024)114 ITR 434 (Ahd)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Interest on capital borrowed-Advances and loans to Associated enterprises-Advances Converted to equity in subsequent year not rendered quasi capital unless conversion made at time of grant of loan-Matter remanded to the CIT(A) [S.36(1)(iii), 92]

Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. ACIT (2024)114 ITR 434 (Ahd)(Trib)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Expenditure-Disallowance on percentage basis-Disallowance on estimate basis is not proper.

Hindalco Industries Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024)114 ITR 502 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Membership fees for club-Welfare of employees providing business benefits-Allowable as expenditure.

Hindalco Industries Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024)114 ITR 502 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Community development-Operation of aluminium mines causing pollution in neighbourhood-Assistance with respect to drinking water, education, women and children welfare, etc., for villagers-Commercial exigency to ensure smooth running of factories-Allowable as deduction.

Hindalco Industries Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024)114 ITR 502 (Mum)(Trib)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Commission payments-Non-service of notice under section 133(6)-Evidence and details furnished in remand report-Denial of expenditure for mere return of summons unserved is improper.[S.133(6)]

Hindalco Industries Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2024)114 ITR 502 (Mum)(Trib)