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-Employee’s stock option plan-Option to purchase shares after completion of vesting period at a lesser price than the market value-Ascertainable liability-Allowable as deduction [S. 145]
Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2022)97 ITR 516 (Delhi) (Trib)
S.37(1): Business expenditure-Additional levy of coal pursuant to Supreme court direction-Allowable as deduction. [S. 145]
Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2022)97 ITR 516 (Delhi) (Trib)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Travelling expenses-Ad-hoc disallowance is not justified.
Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2022)97 ITR 516 (Delhi) (Trib)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Mercantile system of accounting-leas rent paid pertaining to earlier year-Crystallised during financial year-Allowable as deduction.[S. 145]
Kamla Retail Ltd. v. Addl. CIT(2022) 212 DTR 94 / 216 TTJ 483 / 140 taxmann.com 343 (Chd)(Trib)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Foreign Travel expense-Expenses or payments not deductible-Excessive or unreasonable-Motor Car Expenditure to director-Restriction of disallowance to 10% is held to be justified.[S. 40A(2)]
Dy. CIT v. S. Kumars Nationwide Ltd. (2022) 97 ITR 60 (SN) (Mum) (Trib)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Payment for subscription services of software-No acquisition of software-Telephone and internet expenses-Allowable as revenue expenditure.
Bigfoot Retail Solution Pvt. Ltd v. ACIT (2022)97 ITR 73 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or Revenue-Non-compete fee-Amortised-Depreciation claimed-Capital expenditure. [S. 32]
Adler Mediequip Pvt. Ltd v. Dy.CIT (2022)97 ITR 20 (SN) (Pune) (Trib)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Restatement of foreign exchange loss-Assessing Officer directed to verify and allow.
Triumph International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2022)100 ITR 33 (SN)(Chennai) (Trib)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Provision for slow or non-moving and obsolete inventory-A separate provision in this regard, could not be allowed to the assessee-Liability not crystallised is not allowable as deduction. [S. 145]
Roca Bathroom Products Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022)100 ITR 65 (SN)(Chennai) (Trib)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or Revenue-Advertisement expenses not debited to Profit and loss account but accounted in balance-sheet as “Capital Work-In-Progress (Brand Building expenditure)”-Allowable as deduction. [S. 145]
ACIT v. Rosebys Interiors India Ltd. (2022)100 ITR 4 (SN)(Ahd) (Trib)