Landmark Cases on Business Income and Deductions

1,377 decisions, ranked by how many judgments on BharatTax rely on them.

CIT v. Eicher Motors Ltd.
293 ITR 464 · 2007 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Expenditure by way of royalty is an allowable revenue deduction if it is for a limited license to use know-how, where the assessee is not vested with proprietary rights. This is especially true if the payment falls within a reasonable range based on comparable transactions.

CIT v. Enron Oil & Gas India Ltd.
305 ITR 75 · 2008 · Supreme Court
22
citing judgments

The Production Sharing Contract (PSC) is a self-contained code. Provisions of the Income-tax Act apply to the computation of income of the assessee under the PSC. Overhead charges incurred by the head office and charged to the assessee's profit and loss account are allowable as a deduction if incurred for the purpose of business.

CIT v. Gian Chand Labour Contractors
316 ITR 127 · 2009 · High Court
22
citing judgments

When an Assessing Officer rejects an assessee's books of accounts, they must estimate sales and Gross Profit (GP) rates, potentially using comparative figures from similar businesses.

DIT v. Rio Tinto Technical Services
340 ITR 507 · 2012 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Income that is considered business income for tax purposes must be computed on a net basis, accounting for expenses incurred to earn that income, and cannot be taxed in India on a gross basis.

CIT v. Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd.
352 ITR 88 · 2013 · High Court
22
citing judgments

A provision created by an assessee for wage arrears in anticipation of a pay revision cannot be treated as an unascertained liability if there is no dispute regarding the terms of employment and the only dispute is about the quantification of wages.

CIT-1, Lucknow v. U.P. Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd.
37 Taxmann.com 164 · 2013 · High Court
22
citing judgments

The provision of Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is not applicable to interest payable on loans obtained from the Government of India. Consequently, disallowance under Section 43B for non-payment of such interest is not permissible.

CIT v. Elphistone Spg. &Wvg. Mills Co. Ltd.
40 ITR 142 · 1960 · Supreme Court
22
citing judgments

Profits and gains are understood to include losses, meaning profits can be positive or negative income. Both positive and negative profits are of a revenue character and must be included in the computation of taxable income.

CIT v. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd.
403 ITR 426 · 2018 · Supreme Court
22
citing judgments

Interest earned on share application money deposited with banks is income from other sources, and it can be set off against public issue expenses.

PCIT v. Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturers (P.) Ltd.
409 ITR 85 · 2018 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Section 40A(3) disallowance is required when income is estimated by adopting a Net Profit Rate.

CIT v. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I). Ltd.
41 Taxmann.com 540 · 2014 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A is not justified when the assessee's interest-free funds exceed the investments made for earning exempt dividend income.

Gareware Wall Ropes Ltd. v. ACIT
46 Taxmann.com 18 · 2014 · ITAT
22
citing judgments

Strategic investments in wholly-owned subsidiaries are to be excluded when calculating the disallowance under Section 14A, which pertains to expenses incurred in relation to exempt income. This exclusion applies even when these investments are made for holding a controlling stake rather than for earning dividends.

S.M. Ram Lal & Co. v. Secretary to Government of Punjab
5 SCC 574 · 1998 · Reported
22
citing judgments

The ordinary meaning of the word 'use', as a noun, is the act of employing a thing, putting it into action or service, or applying it to a given purpose. This definition encompasses the action of using something, the fact or state of being used, and its application or conversion to some purpose.

B.T. Patil & Sons Belgaum Constructions (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT, Circle- 2, Kolhapur
59 SOT 61 · 2013 · ITAT
22
citing judgments

An assessee engaged in developing an infrastructure facility is entitled to deduction under section 80IA(4) if the infrastructure facility is owned by the assessee. The work done by the assessee must satisfy the ownership requirement under the section.

Om Shakthi Agencies (Madras) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT
66 Taxmann.com 287 · 2016 · ITAT
22
citing judgments

Payments made for commercial expediency in respect of property purchase are not subject to addition under section 40A(3), particularly when provisions of Rule 66(k) apply.

44 SOT 93 (Ahmedabad) (URO) 13. U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
70 SOT 517 · 2015 · ITAT
22
citing judgments

A rail system that functions solely as a profit siding and not an infrastructure facility of public utility is not eligible for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act.

Rayala Corporation (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
72 Taxmann.com 149 · 2016 · Supreme Court
22
citing judgments

Income derived from renting out property by a company whose business, as per its Memorandum of Association, is commercial exploitation of property is to be treated as business income, even if it is in the nature of rent.

Martin & Harris Pvt Ltd. v. CIT
73 Taxmann 555 · 1994 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Interest paid on professional tax is compensatory in nature and is allowable as a deduction under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

CIT v. Fortuna Foundation Engineers & Consultants (P.) Ltd.
81 Taxmann.com 189 · 2017 · High Court
22
citing judgments

The requirement to file an audit report in Form 10CCB before the due date for claiming deductions under Section 80-IB(11A) is directory, not mandatory. Therefore, a claim for deduction cannot be denied solely because the report was not uploaded on or before the due date for furnishing the audit report.

1. Karim Tharuvi v. State of Kerla
48 ITR 83 · 1963 · Supreme Court
22
citing judgments

Expenses incurred for maintenance of immature tea bushes in an existing garden are revenue in nature and allowable as deductions. Such expenses do not create an enduring benefit of a capital nature.

CIT v. Sportking India Ltd.
324 ITR 283 · 2010 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Insurance compensation received for damage to stock-in-trade or raw materials is considered profit or loss from an industrial undertaking and is eligible for deduction under sections 80IA and 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Fibrefill Engineers v. CIT
177 TTJ 556 · 2017 · ITAT
22
citing judgments

A deduction under Section 80IC cannot be denied solely because the return of income was filed belatedly, provided the conditions for filing a belated return under Section 139 are met.

Tata Tea Ltd. v. ACIT
338 ITR 285 · 2011 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Blending of tea is a manufacturing activity. The Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue against the decision was dismissed by the Apex Court.

CIT v. Amitabh Bachchan
343 ITR 161 · 2012 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Interest expenditure is allocable to a unit based on the actual utilization of borrowed funds, not on an ad-hoc basis without establishing a nexus.

CIT v. Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.
265 ITR 177 · 2004 · High Court
22
citing judgments

A levy is penal in nature if criminal liability or prosecution is provided. Otherwise, the key test is whether the penalty for non-compliance entails compensatory or penal consequences.

CIT v. Panama Chemicals Works
292 ITR 147 · 2007 · High Court
22
citing judgments

An assessee's claim for deduction under sections like 80-I or 80-IA cannot be denied solely for failing to file the audit report (Form 10CCB) along with the return, provided it is filed before the completion of the assessment and any delay is for good and sufficient reasons.

K. Ravindramatham Nair v. Dy. CIT
262 ITR 669 · 2003 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Interest earned on a compulsory deposit of sale receipts as a condition for obtaining a bank loan is not business income for the purposes of Section 80HHC.

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. DCIT
353 ITR 474 · High Court
22
citing judgments

When considering a deduction claim under Section 80HHC, the provisions of Section 80IA(9) must be applied. The formation of the Assessing Officer's belief for issuing a notice is subject to judicial review based on whether there was relevant material for a reasonable person to form that belief.

Prakash Leasing Ltd. v. DCIT
208 Taxmann 464 · 2012 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Disclosure standards applicable for computing taxable income are considered for revenue recognition, and revenue is recognized when there is reasonable uncertainty of its ultimate collection.

CIT v. Pandian Chemicals Ltd.
233 ITR 497 · 1998 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Expenses that provide an enduring benefit to the assessee are capital in nature and cannot be claimed as a deduction under section 37(1).

CIT v. Meghalaya Steels Ltd.
332 ITR 91 · 2011 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Central excise duty refund, granted based on exemption notifications, is not considered income and is eligible for deduction under Section 80-IC of the Income Tax Act. This is because the refund is a mechanism to operationalize an exemption rather than an increase in profit.

CIT v. TVS Motors Ltd.
364 ITR 1 · 2014 · High Court
22
citing judgments

The cost of dyes and moulds used in the manufacturing process is a revenue expenditure when they are for replacement and have a short life, facilitating the main production process without creating a new asset.

CIT v. Monnet Industries Ltd.
332 ITR 627 · 2011 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for expansion of an ongoing business is often treated as revenue expenditure, and the functional test should be applied to determine the nature of expenditure, rather than solely classifying it as capital expenditure.

State Bank of Hyderabad v. DCIT
33 Taxmann.com 312 · 2013 · ITAT
22
citing judgments

A scheduled bank can claim a deduction for provisions for bad and doubtful debts made in its books of account, provided it does not exceed specified limits related to total income and rural branch advances, as per section 36(1)(viia).

CIT v. HDFC Bank
104 Taxmann.com 97 · 2019 · High Court
22
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A is not warranted merely because an assessee has sufficient interest-free funds to make investments that yield exempt income. No disallowance is called for if no expenditure is found to have been incurred for earning exempt income.

Wall Construction Co Ltd. v. JCIT
102 TTJ 505 · 2006 · ITAT
21
citing judgments

Interest expenditure on borrowed funds used for stock-in-trade is allowable as a deduction in the year the revenue is offered to tax, even when following the percentage completion method for recognizing revenue.

Pooja Paper Trading Co. v. ITO
104 Taxmann.com 95 · 2019 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Where purchases are found to be bogus, only the profit element embedded in such purchases is to be added to the assessee's income, not the entire amount. The High Court sustained an addition to the extent of 12.5% of the bogus purchases.

CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd.
112 TTJ 94 · 2007 · ITAT
21
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred to establish a new unit of an existing business is considered an extension of that business, not a new business. Therefore, related expenses are allowable as revenue expenditure and depreciation on support equipment is eligible.

1. Lason India (Vetri Software) v. ITO (
129 TTJ 273 · ITAT
21
citing judgments

Deduction under Section 10A is to be independently computed for the eligible unit without adjustment against losses or unabsorbed depreciation of non-eligible units. This deduction is in the nature of a deduction, not an exemption.

Virmati Ramkrishna v. CIT
131 ITR 659 · 1981 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for the purpose of making or earning income from 'other sources' is deductible if there is a nexus between the expenditure and the income earned. The expenditure must be linked to the income earned, not just the activity that generates the income.

PCIT v. Punjab National Bank
140 Taxmann.com 131 · 2022 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Section 14A of the Income-tax Act is not attracted, and dividend income cannot be disallowed, when shares are held as stock-in-trade by banks, with the primary purpose of trading for profit. This applies even if the shares were acquired through an IPO.

Kaveri Rice Mills v. CIT
157 Taxmann 376 · 2006 · High Court
21
citing judgments

When additions are made to income based on purchases, the extent of the addition can be limited to the gross profit, not necessarily the total purchase amount.

Commissioner of Income-tax v. Udaipur Secure Meters Ltd.
175 Taxmann 567 · 2008 · High Court
21
citing judgments

The rule of law established in this case pertains to the deductibility of expenses under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, particularly when they are considered business expenditures.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Western India Paper and Paperboard Private Limited
189 ITR 309 · 1991 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Expenditure not allowable under Section 36(1)(iv) of the Income Tax Act may still be allowable under Section 37 of the Act, even if the Tribunal followed this decision.

CIT v. Bharat Iron & Steel Industries
199 ITR 67 · 1993 · High Court
21
citing judgments

For taxability under Section 41(1), the assessee must have obtained some benefit, whether in cash or otherwise, in respect of a loss or expenditure previously allowed as a deduction. Later amendments may affect the applicability of this principle.

49 ITR 160 (SC); International Airport Authority of India v. CIT
218 ITR 598 · 1996 · High Court
21
citing judgments

The aim, object, and resultant advantage of an expenditure are considered to characterize whether it is capital or revenue in nature.

(i) CIT v. Malayalam Plantation Ltd.
220 ITR 29 · 1996 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for the purpose of reclamation of mining land, to fulfill statutory obligations for phased restoration, is allowable as business expenditure.

CIT v. Fascel Ltd.
221 CTR 305 · 2009 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Spectrum Usage Charges (SUC) and Wireless Planning Commission charges are allowable as revenue expenditure.

Walford Transport (Eastern India) Ltd. v. CIT
240 ITR 902 · 1999 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act aims to prevent tax evasion and unaccounted money, not to penalize genuine cash payments. When the genuineness of a transaction and the payee's identity are established, a liberal view may be taken for compelling circumstances.

DCIT v. K. K. Doshi and Co.
245 ITR 849 · 2000 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Profits and losses arising from foreign exchange fluctuations are part of export turnover and are includible in profits eligible for deduction under Section 10A/10B of the Income Tax Act. Service charges may not be considered operational income if they don't accrue out of the main business activity.

ACIT v. Rajasthan Spinning
274 ITR 463 · 2005 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Expenditure is admissible as revenue if activities are closely linked with the welfare of a specific industry, despite conferring an enduring benefit.