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 assessee filed the return of income declaring a total income of Rs. Nil. However, AO completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) read with Section 144B determining the assessed income at Rs. 3,37,97,789/-.
Sales and marketing services rendered to assessee by its US based subsidiary did not fall within the ambit of FTS as defined u/s 9(1)(vi) or Article 12 of India-US DTAA as making available service did not make available knowledge, experience, skill etc.
Delhi High Court held that goodwill could be considered as an intangible asset and the same is eligible for depreciation. Assets acquired de-valued, hence balance amount treated as intangible asset and the same is eligible for depreciation.
ITAT Delhi held that the assessee is not required to prove that a particular debt had become bad debt in order to claim deduction on account of bad debt written off pursuant to the amendment made u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act after 01.04.1989.
ITAT Bangalore held that interest due to delayed payment of custom duty is deductible u/s 37 of the Act as it is an accretion to the main payment and not a penalty and accordingly allowable as deduction.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that deduction under Section 80-IB/80-IE of the Income Tax Act disallowed on loan to employees and bank deposits as such interest income is not income derived from industrial undertaking.
Portion attributable to utilisation for import of assets into India must be capitalised under Section 43A, while the portion attributable to utilisation for acquiring assets from within India must be treated as revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act.
The Karnataka High Court, upholding the ITAT’s order, reiterated that discounts on the issuance of ESOPs are allowable deductions under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, in line with the decision in Biocon Ltd.
ITAT Delhi held that mere change of opinion would not confer jurisdiction upon the Assessing Officer to reopen proceedings without anything further. Thus, reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act set aside.
Bombay High Court remanded the matter of correct treatment of losses arising due to exchange rate fluctuation since order doesn’t deal with import of Section 43A of the Income Tax Act and its interplay with section 37(1).
