Tag: allowability 37(1)
Allowability u/s 37(1) of fine /penalty for redemption of goods ordered to be confiscated for breach of import conditions – High Court explains the Law ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2801 (2019) (02) HC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties CIT V/s. Ahmedabad Cotton Mfg. Co Ltd. …
Kind of expenditure a legal professional can legitimately and justly claim is entirely different from basic expenditure a commercial entity can claim – SC dismisses SLP of the assessee ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2713 (2019) (01) SC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon: Shanti Bhushan v. Commissioner of …
ITAT explain the expression wholly and exclusively used in section 37. ‘Wholly” relates to quantification and “exclusively” refers to the motive, objects and purpose of the expenditure. ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2616 (2018) (11) ITAT The appellant assessee was in appeal before the Tribunal against order of …
Expenses on Business Management Course abroad for directors son held as not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business of assessee ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2417 (2018) 07 HC The instant appeal was filed by the appellant company against the order passed by the Income …
Deduction for Penal excise was allowed u/s 37 as it was paid in discharging contractual obligation to indemnify department for violating terms of affidavit ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2222 (2018) (02) HC The respondent assessee was engaged in the business of manufacturing and its sale. An intending …
Destruction of Pan Masala stock on court’s order due to impermissible limits of magnesium carbonate disallowed u/s 37(1) being prohibited by law and not incurred for the purpose of business – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2124 (2017) (11) ITAT The Challenge/Grievance:The instant appeal was filed by …
Legal expenses to defend writ filed to quash mining lease of the company are revenue expenditure not capital expenditure and deduction is allowable u/s 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – High Court ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2021 (2017) (08) HC The Substantial Question of …
Disallowance u/s 37 for legal fee paid in excess of damages received in the relevant case deleted. Profit in immediate proximity not a basis of disallowance – High Court ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2019 (2017) (08) HC The Grievance: The appellant revenue had filed the instant …
Voluntarily charity not business expenditure u/s 37(1). Mere assertion that it was incurred for business cannot be accepted without establishing nexus – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 1266 (2017) (05) ITAT The Grievance: The appellant assessee was aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Income …
In a recent judgment, ITAT Mumbai has opined that merely because an income has been taxed in the hands of recipient , does not mean that it is a deductible expenditure in the hands of the person making the payment instead the deduction is required to be examined …
