← All Phrases

“explanation to section 37”

Business ExpensesSection 37Section 37317 judgments

The decision most relied on for explanation to section 37 is ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. (165 ITD 27), cited in 882 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on explanation to section 37

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
165 ITD 27 · 2017 · ITAT
882
citing judgments

No disallowance under section 14A can be made while computing book profits under section 115JB unless the expenditure is debited to the profit and loss account and satisfies clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2).

Union of India v. Dharmendra Textile Processors
306 ITR 277 · 2008 · Supreme Court
501
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is a strict civil liability, and willful concealment is not an essential ingredient for attracting it. The explanation appended to the section indicates this element of strict liability for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
374 ITR 118 · 2015 · High Court
499
citing judgments

The existence of an international transaction for Advertising and Marketing Promotion (AMP) expenditure requires the revenue to discharge the burden of proof. An explanation inserted under Section 92B does not automatically make AMP expenditure an international transaction.

Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. v. CIT
1 SCC 139 · 1980 · Supreme Court
214
citing judgments

The cardinal principle of tax law dictates that the law applicable to an assessment is the law in force for the relevant assessment year, unless the statute expressly or implicitly provides otherwise. A clarificatory statutory explanation must be read into the main provision from its inception.

CIT v. S.G. Pgnatale
124 ITR 391 · 1980 · High Court
181
citing judgments

An Explanation to Section 9(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act that widens the scope of the provision, rather than merely clarifying it, cannot be applied retrospectively to assessment periods prior to its effective date. Assessments must be made according to the law in force at the relevant time.

616 (Raj.) and 9. CIT v. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd.
217 Taxmann 207 · 2013 · High Court
170
citing judgments

Prior to the insertion of Explanation 2 to Section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, there was an ambiguity regarding the due date for payment of employees' contribution to provident fund and ESI. The ambiguity was whether the due date was as per the respective Acts or the due date for filing the assessee's return of income.

Apex Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
135 Taxmann.com 286 · 2022 · Supreme Court
148
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred by pharmaceutical companies on freebies provided to medical practitioners is not deductible under Explanation 1 to Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, as such gifting is prohibited by the Medical Council Regulations, 2002. The court also held that what is directly prohibited by law cannot be indirectly evaded through contrivance.

CIT v. Ganpat Ram Bisnoi
296 ITR 292 · 2008 · High Court
145
citing judgments

An assessment order cannot be revised under Section 263 for being erroneous due to a perceived lack of enquiry if the Assessing Officer has already conducted an enquiry, applied their mind, and accepted the assessee's explanation.

Judgments citing explanation to section 37

M/S Kiran Roadlines, Gandhidham vs. The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhidham

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 27/RJT/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot03 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 27/Rjt/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15) M/S. Kiran Roadlines Assistant Commissioner बनाम/ “Kiran House”, P.O. Box Of Income Tax Vs. No.234, Plot No.8, Sector Gandhidham Circle, No.8, Gandhidham Gandhidham "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakfk1640C .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 02/01/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 03/01/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.12.2018 Passed By The Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 3, Rajkot (‘The Cit(A)’), Arising Out Of The

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 37

levied for infringement of law and rules of the State specifying the permissible capacity. Ld. AO further stated that as per provision of explanation to Section 37 of the Act, any expenditure incurred by an assessee for any purpose which is an offence or prohibited by law shall