Income Tax : Explains when food and hospitality expenses qualify as business deductions and outlines the tests under Section 37(1) to distingui...
Income Tax : Explains how Section 37(1) restricts deductions to expenses exclusively for business and highlights gray-area items like home offi...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held settlement payments in foreign civil cases are deductible under Section 37(1) as compensatory, not penal, and ...
Income Tax : Summary of Section 37(1) IT Act for business expenditure deduction. Covers "wholly and exclusively" test, commercial expediency, ...
Income Tax : Examines the tax implications of employer-funded education, covering employer deductions and employee taxation. Includes analysis ...
Income Tax : Interest income earned by a foreign bank from foreign currency loans extended to Indian corporates was taxable on a gross basis. S...
Income Tax : ITAT Jodhpur held that Section 37(1) business expenses cannot be disallowed without specific findings on genuineness. All appeals ...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that an accrued business liability supported by evidence is deductible under Section 37(1) despite future payment...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that eligible CSR donations qualify for Section 80G deduction if statutory conditions are met, despite disallowan...
Income Tax : ITAT held that increased employee remuneration cannot be disallowed merely because business revenue declined where the expenditure...
The issue was whether revision under section 263 was valid for multiple expense claims. The Tribunal held that since the Assessing Officer had examined issues and adopted a plausible view, revision was unsustainable.
The Tribunal upheld revision since business expenses were within limited scrutiny and education cess deduction was not verified. The key takeaway is that lack of enquiry on a covered issue makes the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.
The Tribunal ruled that absence of formal registers or third-party bills does not automatically make expenses bogus. Additions based purely on estimates, without proof of inflation, are arbitrary and unsustainable.
Mumbai ITAT ruled that expenses covered by a binding APA cannot be revisited under section 37 on a “need or benefit” test. Reopening settled transfer pricing issues would defeat the statutory purpose of APA.
Delhi ITAT ruled that purchases from paper companies cannot be treated as normal business expenses under Section 37(1). Fraudulent transactions with no goods delivered attract unexplained expenditure taxation under Section 69C and 115BBE.
he tribunal held that an appellate order based on an incorrect and reconstructed timeline of statutory notices is unsustainable. Errors in sequencing of notices strike at the root of jurisdiction and require fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal reaffirmed that once expenditure is shown to be wholly and exclusively for business, section 37(1) disallowance cannot survive. Suspicion cannot override documentary and commercial reality.
The issue was whether bogus purchases disallowed under section 37(1) must be reclassified as unexplained expenditure under section 69C. ITAT held that where the source of expenditure is known, section 69C cannot be mechanically invoked.
The Tribunal ruled that AMP expenses incurred by a brand-owning trader cannot be allocated to contract manufacturers without proof of obligation or agreement. Tax incentives enjoyed by related entities alone were held insufficient.
The Tribunal partly allowed the Revenue’s appeal by holding that interest incurred on borrowings used for project development must be capitalised. Absence of evidence showing alternative use of funds justified capitalization.
