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 : The Supreme Court held that interest paid on borrowed funds was deductible under Section 36(1)(iii) because the loan was used for ...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court held that grants disbursed by a statutory corporation formed part of its core business functions and qualified a...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that although foreign commission expenditure was non-genuine and liable for disallowance, amounts already written...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai held that before the 2016 amendment, DSIR approval under Section 35(2AB) related to the in-house R&D facility and not...
Income Tax : The Mumbai ITAT allowed deduction of professional fees paid for facilitating remittances relating to Iranian-origin imports affect...
The case addressed disallowance of employee contributions deposited beyond prescribed timelines. The Tribunal upheld the legal position but directed verification of actual compliance with statutory due dates.
The case involved disallowance of employee contributions during return processing. The Tribunal held such adjustments invalid on debatable issues and directed deletion of additions.
The relocation did not lead to structural enhancement of business assets. The Tribunal ruled that such expenses remain in the revenue field. The decision distinguishes between operational and capital expenditure.
Tribunal held that non-compliance with earlier appellate directions requires fresh adjudication. Key takeaway: appellate authorities must follow binding instructions.
Consistency over technicalities: ITAT Mumbai allowed actuarial pension provision as an ascertained liability, rejected mechanical disallowances, and held CBDT instructions cannot override the Income-tax Act.
The case examined whether promotional expenses should be capitalized under the project completion method. The Tribunal held that such expenses, not linked to inventory development, are allowable as revenue expenditure.
The Tribunal upheld deletion of expense disallowance after finding that occupation charges were settled during the relevant year. It ruled that such crystallized liabilities are allowable under Section 37(1), dismissing the Revenue’s objections.
ITAT Mumbai remanded ₹95.81 lakh commission disallowance, holding that non-response to Section 133(6) notices alone cannot justify addition without proper verification; ad-hoc expense disallowance reduced from 20% to 10%.
Transfer of passive infrastructure (PI) assets under a court-approved scheme of demerger without consideration qualified as a gift under Section 47(iii), thereby legitimizing the claim of depreciation on such assets.
Tribunal rules that Section 14A disallowance must be limited to investments yielding exempt income and orders recomputation under Rule 8D. It also allows ESOP expenses as a valid business deduction under Section 37(1), treating them as an ascertained liability and not a notional or capital expense.
