Landmark Cases on Business Income and Deductions

Administrative and interest expenses incurred for earning exempt dividend income are to be disallowed. This disallowance is permitted under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act.

Form 3CL is a mere report for intimation of the approval of an R&D facility and is not intended for the approval or quantification of expenditure. This is supported by Rule 6(7A) of the Income Tax Rules and amendments to Section 35(3) of the Income Tax Act.

Interest charged on late realization of sale proceeds is treated as business income and is eligible for deduction under Section 80-I.

A provision for warranties is not deductible if the liability has not crystallized and is uncertain, as it does not represent a present obligation arising from past events.

An addition on account of expenditure cannot be made under section 69C if the Assessing Officer has not established that the assessee actually incurred the expenditure.

A transaction involving the purchase of land, especially if part of a series of similar transactions and likely to be acquired by the government, can be considered an adventure in the nature of trade, leading to the profit being assessed as business income.

When income is estimated based on turnover and gross profit, disallowance under Section 40A(3) is not permissible as the estimated gross profit already accounts for expenses like purchases.

A business is considered 'set up' only when it is ready to function and discharge its intended purpose, not merely when preparatory operations have begun. This readiness signifies the stage where the unit can commence functioning as a business or manufacturing organization.

The terms 'enduring benefit' and 'rights of permanent nature' in relation to expenditure are descriptive, not definitive, and are relative, not absolute. Therefore, the presence of such terms does not automatically render an expenditure capital in nature.

The Supreme Court considers the submissions and the materials on record in cases where an assessee is a civil contractor engaged in infrastructure development and receives large contracts from government agencies.

The aggregate of business profits and losses from derivative transactions must be worked out before applying the Explanation to Section 73 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This means that trading of shares and derivative transactions are not considered speculative transactions under Section 43(5) for the purposes of Sections 28 to 41.

A contractual liability for purchases is an allowable deduction in the year the liability is incurred, even if the assessee disputes the liability and the payee files a suit for recovery.

Interest expenses directly attributable to earning taxable income should be excluded from the disallowance calculation under Rule 8D(2)(ii). Only interest expenses that are neither directly attributable to tax-exempt income nor taxable income are to be allocated as per the Rule 8D(2)(i) formula.

A scheduled bank with rural branches is eligible for deduction under section 36(1)(viia) for provision made for bad and doubtful debts, even if the provision does not specifically relate to rural advances.

A non-compete fee paid as part of an agreement to prevent competition or induce employees to stay is to be treated as a revenue expenditure.

When interest-free funds are available to an assessee, it is presumed that investments were made out of such interest-free funds.

Benefit or income foregone, such as a lesser amount of share premium received on share issuance, cannot be considered an expenditure under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act as it does not represent an actual loss or incurred liability.

Interest paid for the broken period on purchase of dated government securities and interest received for the broken period on sale of such securities, if treated as trading assets, can be claimed as revenue expenditure under section 28. Income falling under section 18 of the Income Tax Act cannot also fall under section 28.

Expenditure incurred for obtaining technical know-how under a collaboration agreement, where it provides for future benefits and is paid in installments, may be treated as capital expenditure. This is especially relevant when the know-how is intended to enhance the assessee's business capabilities and products.

Courts are applying divergent views on the issue of bogus purchases. In some instances, to balance justice, a lumpsum disallowance at a specific GP rate (e.g., 5% or 3%) has been applied to alleged bogus purchases, with a caveat that it should not be treated as a precedent.

Interest earned from funds deployed in business activity cannot be classified under the head 'income from other sources'. It is to be considered as income from business and profession.

Expenditure is allowable as a deduction if it is incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the assessee's business. This reiterates the view taken in Hindustan Aluminum Corporation Ltd.'s case.

The onus is on the assessee to prove that expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes. The mere existence of a contract does not automatically make an expenditure deductible.

Lump sum payments for lease, even for an extended period, can be considered revenue expenditure if they substitute for revenue expenditure. Payments that substitute for revenue expenditure are generally treated as revenue expenditure.

Expenditure that has been deferred in the books of accounts is to be treated as revenue expenditure in the year in which it is incurred, irrespective of its treatment in the books of account.

The case discusses the criteria for an assessee's work to be classified as that of a 'contractor' or 'developer', which is relevant for determining eligibility for deductions.

Investment in a subsidiary is considered a business expenditure if made for commercial expediency and to further business objectives, and any resulting loss is treated as a business loss.

The benefit of tax deductions under Section 80-IB (and similarly Section 80-IA) is attached to the undertaking, not the owner. Therefore, if an undertaking is transferred as a running concern, the successor is entitled to the benefit for the unexpired period.

Distinguishing between capital and income receipts, and between trading and non-trading profits, involves questions of law to be drawn from the facts. A voluntary payment, for which the recipient has no legal right to compensation, may not be taxable.

Expenditure must be wholly and exclusively for business expediency, judged from the businessman's point of view, not the revenue's.

Interest on loans taken for business purposes remains deductible even if the asset acquired with the loan is later sold, as long as the liability for the loan continues to exist. The fact that the cinema house was eventually sold does not negate the deductibility of interest if the borrowing subsisted.

Interest payable under section 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act is not an allowable business expenditure under section 37(1). This is a well-settled position affirmed by multiple High Courts.

A mandatory change in the method of accounting, if bonafide, allows for deductions based on the changed method when computing business income. The method of accounting for lease followed by an assessee, based on ICAI guidelines, was accepted.

If there has been substantial compliance with the conditions for a deduction, minor deviations may not invalidate the deduction.

The Assessing Officer can only invoke Rule 8D for disallowances under section 14A if they are not satisfied with the correctness of the expenditure claimed by the assessee concerning exempt income, and must record this dissatisfaction. This is a condition precedent to applying Rule 8D.

Income surrendered during a survey, if relating to unaccounted receivables of a business, is treated as business income. This allows for set-off of legitimate business expenses against such surrendered income, making the assessee eligible for deductions on that income.

An amount not allowed as a deduction under a specific section can still be considered a business loss if it was incurred for business purposes.

Deduction for employee's contribution to PF/ESI can be allowed if paid before the due date of filing the return of income, even if paid after the statutory due date under the respective act.

Expenditure connected with the acquisition of land is capital in nature and the Assessing Officer is justified in treating it as such.

Section 40(a)(i)/(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, pertains to outgoing revenue expenditure and does not apply to capital expenditure, meaning depreciation cannot be disallowed under these provisions for capital expenses, such as software purchases.

Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act aims to boost infrastructure development, particularly transport infrastructure, and its object and scope are to be understood in that context. The Supreme Court upholds the interpretation of Section 80IA as promoting infrastructure, aligning with legislative intent.

Profits and gains from scraps resulting from a manufacturing process are eligible for deduction under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act.

Disallowance of interest expenditure is unwarranted when the assessee has demonstrated sufficient interest-free funds available to cover advances given to third parties, and the Assessing Officer cannot prove otherwise.

Expenditure incurred on allotment of shares to employees as part of an Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) is allowable as revenue expenditure. The discount on shares granted to employees under an ESOP is considered a perquisite and taxed accordingly.

A publisher can be considered a manufacturer of books even if they do not own a printing press or book-binding facilities, as long as the printing and binding are done under their supervision. The printer is considered a contractor, not the manufacturer.

Disallowance of expenses under section 40(a)(ia) cannot be made based on a subsequent change in law if tax was deducted at rates prevalent at the time of deduction, following established judicial pronouncements.

Income from finished flats treated as stock-in-trade is to be computed under the head 'income from business'. This applies even to unsold flats.

When considering the deductibility of payments, the established legal principle from Sarabhai M. Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT is applied, particularly regarding the nature of the expenditure and its relation to the business operations.

Losses arising from forward contracts entered into as part of regular business activities are treated as normal business losses.