S. 40(a)(iia) : Amounts not deductible-Wealth tax-Matter remanded.
Swan Silk (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 282 Taxman 191 (Karn.)(HC)S. 40(a)(iia) : Amounts not deductible-Wealth tax-Matter remanded.
Swan Silk (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 282 Taxman 191 (Karn.)(HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Credit card expenses-Not produced the evidence-Business development expenses-Foreign Travel Expenses-Not allowable as deduction.
Swan Silk (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 282 Taxman 191 (Karn.)(HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-10% ad-hoc disallowance-Transport charges-Self made vouchers-Matter remanded for de novo consideration for verification of all documents. [S. 145]
V.C. Arunai Vadivelan v. ACIT (2021) 282 Taxman 90 (Mad.) (HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Expenditure incurred in violation of statutory provisions-Not allowable as deduction-Explanation 1 [Mines And Minerals (Development And Regulation) Act, 1957, S. 4(1a), 21]
PCIT v. M. Abdul Zahid (2021) 437 ITR 132 /(2022) 286 Taxman 138 (Karn.) (HC) PCIT v. Jay Minerals (2021) 437 ITR 132 / ( 2022) 286 Taxman 138 (Karn.) (HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Club membership fees-Club service charges-Membership fee allowable as deduction-Amount spent on services is held to be not allowable.
Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 438 ITR 526/ 283 Taxman 427 (Ker.)(HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Acquisition of equipment-Used by dealer in showrooms-Not allowable as revenue expenditure. [S. 32]
Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 438 ITR 526/ 283 Taxman 427 (Ker.)(HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Provision for commission-Ad-hoc basis-Not deductible.
Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. ACIT (2021) 438 ITR 536/ 283 Taxman 427 (Ker.)(HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Ex gratia payments to employees-Allowable as deduction.
CIT v. Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. (2021) 438 ITR 465 (Mad.)(HC)S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Software expenses-Arrears of wages-Ex-gratia payment-Allowable as business expenditure-Payment made to Registrar of Companies for increasing authorised capital-Not allowable as revenue expenditure.
Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 438 ITR 465 /(2022) 284 Taxman 692 (Mad.)(HC)S. 36(1)(vii) :Bad debt-Provision made for bad debts-Banking company-Allowable as deduction though not debited in profit and loss account. [S. 145]
CIT, LTU v. Vijay Bank (2021) 130 taxmann.com 148 (Karn.)(HC) Editorial :SLP was granted to revenue, CIT, LTU v. Vijay Bank (2021) 282 Taxman 296 (SC)