Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 37(1) for pan masala seized deleted following Supreme Court decision

Disallowance u/s 37(1) for pan masala seized deleted following SC decision that Explanation 1 apply to business expenses not to business losses

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2979 (2019) (05) ITAT

Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties:
T.A. Quereshi Vs. CIT (2006) 286 ITR 547

The only issue raised in this appeal WAS against the confirmation of disallowance u/s 37(1) if the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) being losses on goods due to seizure.

The assessee was engaged in the business of manufacturing of Pan Masala products. The assessee had claimed a deduction in the Profit and loss account under the head “goods seized by police”.

On being called upon to substantiate the claim, the assessee submitted that Pan Masala was being transported to a customer, which was seized by Police and handed over to Food and Drug Department.

The Assessing Officer (AO) noted that in the Police panchanama, it was recorded that Pan Masala was adulterated and harmful for human health. Invoking the provisions of Explanation 1 to section 37(1) of the Act, the AO made addition of the same which was upheld in the first appeal.

The Tribunal observed that in this regard, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had held that Explanation 1 to section 37(1) applies to business expenses and not to business losses.

It was noted that in the said case also, the assessee was engaged in the manufacturing and sale of Heroin which was seized. The assessee’s claim of business loss was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by holding that Explanation 1 to section 37(1) is not attracted to business loss.

The Tribunal opined that the facts of the instant case were similar in as much as the assessee claimed business loss on account of seizure of its stock in trade, which did not fall within the realm of Explanation 1 to section 37(1) of the Act.

Accordingly, the Tribunal ordered to delete the addition.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Penalty u/s 271B for unfilled column 40 in Tax Audit Report Form 3CD deleted by ITAT

Penalty u/s 271B for unfilled column 40 in Form 3CD related to details regarding turnover, gross profit etc. for previous…

9 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Merely ex-parte rectifying computation without amending assessment order not make it nullity- ITAT

Merely rectifying computation without amending assessment order without notice to assessee does not nullify the entire assessment  - ITAT In…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Once assessee discharges primary onus, it shifts to AO to bring evidence to contrary – ITAT

Once assessee discharges primary onus of providing basic documents in support of the identity, genuineness and the creditworthiness it shifts…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

Cost Inflation Index for FY/Tax Year 2026-27 notified by CBDT. See Up-to-date Table of CII

CBDT has notified Cost Inflation Index for Financial Year / Tax Year 2026-27 CBDT has notified "384" as Cost Inflation…

6 days ago
  • Income Tax

Power of CIT(A) u/s 251(1)(a) to remand case can be exercised only in best judgment assessment

Power of CIT(A) under section 251(1)(a) to remand case could be exercised only when the assessment is passed u/s 144…

6 days ago
  • ICAI

ICAI (Global Networking) Guidelines, 2025 kept in abeyance

ICAI (Global Networking) Guidelines, 2025 kept in abeyance In February 2026, ICAI had issued ICAI (Global Networking) Guidelines 2025 to…

7 days ago