CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd.

266 ITR 170High Court2004#1221 most cited

What is CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure incurred for the welfare of society at large, even with a remote nexus to the assessee's business, is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1), as the concept of business has evolved to include corporate social responsibility and generating goodwill.

94

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Madras Refineries · 266 ITR 170 · Section 37(1) deduction · CSR expenditure · allowable revenue expenditure · remote nexus to business · societal welfare expenditure · business goodwill · Section 135 · corporate social responsibility

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Madras Refineries Ltd.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI vs. M/S. CHEMPLAST SANMAR LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly-allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2627/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2627/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Chemplast Sanmar Limited, Income Tax, Vs. 9, Cathedral Road, Non-Corporate Circle 8, Chennai - 600 086. Chennai Pan: Aaacc 3000F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl.Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.02.2026

For Appellant: Ms. Gouthami ManivasagamFor Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(7)Section 40A(7)(b)Section 40A(9)Section 43B

…re incurred to earn exempt income, no disallowance u/s.14A can be made. The CIT(A) also directed the AO to allow addition made on account of CSR expenses following the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT vs. Madras Refineries Ltd., 266 ITR 170. Lastly, the CIT(A) directed the AO not to add the provision for gratuity for the purpose of book profit u/s.115JB of the Act following the Tribunal’s order in assessee’s own case for assessment years 2008-09 to 2014-15. Similarly, the CIT(A) deleted the addition made u/s.14A of the Act to the book profits u/s.115JB of the Act. :- 4 -: 5. Being a…

Showing 120 of 94 · Page 1 of 5