← All Phrases

“capital expenditure”

Business ExpensesSection 37Section 373,515 judgments

The decision most relied on for capital expenditure is Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (124 ITR 1), cited in 622 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on capital expenditure

Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT
124 ITR 1 · 1980 · Supreme Court
622
citing judgments

Expenditure is classified as revenue or capital based on its practical business effect, necessity, or expediency, rather than solely on the juristic classification of rights; an enduring benefit does not automatically make an expenditure capital if it facilitates trading operations or business efficiency.

Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT
227 ITR 172 · 1997 · Supreme Court
621
citing judgments

Interest income earned on deposits, particularly before the commencement of business operations or as a requirement for business licensing, is taxable as "income from other sources" under Section 56, and cannot be treated as business income or set off against interest on borrowed funds.

Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. v. CIT
225 ITR 802 · 1997 · Supreme Court
568
citing judgments

Expenditure that provides an enduring benefit should be amortized over its useful life, not allowed as a deduction in a single year, to prevent a distorted picture of profits. Specifically, premium paid on debentures for their issue should be amortized on a straight-line method over the life of the debentures.

South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT
438 ITR 1 · 2021 · Supreme Court
508
citing judgments

The mixed fund theory is affirmed, holding that no disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A can be made if the assessee possesses sufficient non-interest bearing funds, such as capital and reserves, to cover investments made in tax-free securities.

CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection
264 ITR 110 · 2003 · High Court
398
citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable on assets for which the cost has been fully allowed as an application of income under Section 11 in previous years, when computing the income of a charitable trust. Charitable trusts are also entitled to carry forward their deficit.

Taparia Tools Ltd. v. JCIT
372 ITR 605 · 2015 · Supreme Court
343
citing judgments

An expenditure does not automatically become capital in nature merely because it results in some enduring benefit for the assessee; it can be treated as revenue expenditure if incurred for genuine business purposes.

Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT
35 Taxmann.com 335 · 2013 · ITAT
322
citing judgments

The discount arising from the grant of Employee Stock Option Plans (ESOPs) is an allowable business expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as it is an ascertained liability, not a contingent one, and constitutes a revenue expense rather than a capital expense.

Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT
177 ITR 377 · 1989 · Supreme Court
275
citing judgments

Expenditure that provides a commercial advantage of an enduring nature may still be classified as revenue expenditure if its purpose is to facilitate existing trading operations, improve business efficiency, or upgrade existing products, depending on the specific context and objective.

Judgments citing capital expenditure

Sri Devi Tool Engineers Private Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6822/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6822/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2020-21) Sri Devi Tool Engineers V/S. Asst. Director Of Income Private Ltd. Tax, Cpc A 61, Nandjyot Industrial Est, Andheri, Kurla Road Safed, Sakinaka S.O. 400072 1St Floor, Prestige Alpha No. 48/1 48/2, बनाम Beratenaagrahara Begur, Hosur Road, Uttarahalli Hobli, Karnataka 560100 Bengaluru, स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacs6211N Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri. Fenil Bhatt राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik (Sr Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 01.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 07.04.2025 आदेश / Order Per Renu Jauhri [A.M.] :- This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] Dated 29/10/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Act"] For Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2020-21. Page 2

For Appellant: Shri. Fenil BhattFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik (SR DR)
Section 143(1)Section 23Section 250Section 37Section 43B

under: "Disallowances of expenditure u/s.37 Other expenditure Penalty or fine for violation of law Interest u/s.201(1A)/206C(7) interest on income tax Capital Expenditure debited to P&L A/c. Loss on sale of fixed assets Exchange loss related to PPE Expenditure on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) CSR Expenditure

Pramod Lakra, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata vs. Meenakshi Mercantiles Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2489/KOL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit, Circle-11(1), Meenakshi Mercantiles Limited Kolkata Room No 504, Woodburn Aayakar Bhawan, 6Thfloor, P-7, Central, 5A,Bibhabati Bose, Vs. Chowringhee Square, Kolkata, Sarani Kolkata, West Bengal, 700069 Westbengal-700020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm1113E Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Smt. Lata Goyal, Ars Revenue By : Shri Sailen Samadder, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.04.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, &For Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, DR
Section 48

incurred towards Consultancy charges. The Assessing Officer made disallowance under Section 37 of the Act, treating the same as capital expenditure. However on appeal, the learned CIT [A] deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer by observed that the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards Consultancy charges was purely ... consultancy charges in order to make investment, the Assessing Officer was not justified in treating and considering the expenses incurred towards consultancy charges as capital expenditure, disallowable under Section 37 of the Act. Under the circumstances, the learned Tribunal has rightly deleted the disallowance of Rs. 24,37,500/= incurred