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-Fees for technical services-Professional fees paid for advocate to foreign attorneys in connection with IPR services-Directed to examine the taxability of provision with reference to DTAA-Payments were in the nature of pure reimbursement was not accepted. [S. 9(1)(vii)(b), 195]
ACIT v. Subhatosh Majumder (2021) 200 DTR 113 (Kol.)(Trib.)
S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident Fes for technical services-Technical/consultancy services from three non-resident entities against certain fee-Not fees for technical services-Not liable to deduct tax at source-DTAA-India-Singapore. [S. 9(1)(vii), Art. 12(4)]
DCIT v. Forum Homes (P.) Ltd. (2021) 91 ITR 38 (SN) / (2022) 192 ITD 184 (Mum.)(Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Method of accounting-Cash system-Tax Deduction at source payables-Paid on due date-Disallowance is not justified. [S. 145]
Walker Chandilok and Co. LLP v. ACIT (2021) 91 ITR 19 (SN) (Delhi)(Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Commission-Matching principle-Under agreement Commission shall accrue as and when sales finalised-Claim is allowable when sales are accounted. [S. 145]
Tejas Networks Ltd. v. DCIT (2021) 91 ITR 52 (SN) (Bang.)(Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Additional wages paid in terms of Notification of Central Government-Allowable as deduction, though the payment was made in subsequent year. [S. 145]
DCIT v. Sakal Papers Ltd. (2021) 91 ITR 69 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Expenditure related to stock-in-trade to be allowed as revenue expenditure. [S. 2(14)(i)]
ACIT v. Cyrus Investments Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 91 ITR 49 (SN) (Mum.) (Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Ad hoc basis-Expenses relating to Telephone, Mobile, Vehicle Running and maintenance and depreciation on car-Lump sum disallowance of Rs. 20,000 purely on an ad hoc basis-Not sustainable.
Anil Kumar Garg v. ITO (2021) 91 ITR 68 (SN) (Jaipur)(Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Ad-hoc disallowance of 20 percent of expenses-Not sustainable.
Kushal Virendra Tandon v. CIT (2021) 91 ITR 610 / (2022) 215 TTJ 630 (Mum.)(Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue-Conversion of debentures in to equity shares-Documents and stamp charges on conversion-Capital expenditure-Provision of section 35D is not applicable allowance of expenditure incurred after commencement of business. [S. 35D]
Sacmi Engineering India (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 207 DTR 293/(2022) 215 TTJ 1029 (Ahd.)(Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Capital or revenue expenditure-Tenancy agreement-Stamp duty and registration charges-Allowable as revenue expenditure.
Hickson & Dadajee (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2021) 201 DTR 75 (Mum.)(Trib.)