← All Phrases

“legal expenses”

Business ExpensesSection 37Section 37273 judgments

The decision most relied on for legal expenses is CIT v. Calcutta Agency Ltd. (19 ITR 191), cited in 164 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on legal expenses

CIT v. Calcutta Agency Ltd.
19 ITR 191 · 1951 · Supreme Court
164
citing judgments

The assessee bears the burden of proving necessary facts to claim deductions. If the assessee fails to establish these facts, the deduction is not admissible.

CIT v. Goetze (India) Ltd.
361 ITR 505 · 2014 · High Court
121
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A for expenses relating to exempt income is required while computing book profit under Section 115JB. An Assessing Officer's order is erroneous for revision under Section 263 if the view taken was not plausible, legally unsustainable, and incorrect, requiring a recorded finding.

Kesoram Industries & Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT
196 ITR 845 · 1992 · High Court
61
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for exploring the feasibility of expanding or extending an existing business by setting up a new unit in the same line of business is revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure. Such expenditure, including obtaining project reports or legal opinions on desirability or feasibility, does not constitute the setting up of a new business.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. India Discount Co. Ltd.
75 ITR 191 · 1970 · Supreme Court
46
citing judgments

Accounting entries do not override the legal effect of a transaction, and the legality of any transaction must be established independently. The mere nomenclature of an entry in the books of accounts is not determinative of the true nature of the transaction.

CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd.
199 ITR 94 · 1993 · High Court
46
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred by a company for the purpose of its business, including expenses to fulfill statutory legal obligations or those related to an erstwhile business post-transfer, is allowable as revenue expenditure under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Finlay Mills Ltd.
20 ITR 475 · 1951 · Supreme Court
38
citing judgments

Expenditure that is incurred for the protection of a running business without generating a new asset is deductible as a business expense. Such expenditure does not result in an enduring benefit of a capital nature.

CIT v. Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
219 ITR 521 · 1996 · Supreme Court
28
citing judgments

Expenses incurred on amalgamation, legal and professional fees, and contributions to a State Housing Board for worker tenements are considered revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure. This is because these expenditures do not result in an enduring benefit and are part of the company's operational costs.

Sayaji Iron & Engineering Co. v. CIT
121 Taxmann 43 · 2002 · High Court
27
citing judgments

Expenses incurred by a company cannot be considered personal, as a company is an artificial legal entity incapable of incurring personal expenses. Therefore, disallowances on this basis are not sustainable.

Judgments citing legal expenses

M/S R. S. Shetye & Bros, Panaji vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1), Panaji

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 37/PAN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. No.37/Pan/2023 (A.Y.2016-17) R.S.Shetye & Bros, Vs Acit 1(1), Flat.No.14, 1 St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, . Trionara Apartments, Edc, Patto, New Muncipal Market, Panjim Panaji- Goa-403001. Goa-403001. Pan .No.Aabfr9785N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 3

amortized in 10 equal instalments in 10 years. Further the Ld.AR emphasized that such expenditure of payment of stamp duty and registrations charges are legal expenses in connection with the renewal of lease and is a revenue expenditure allowable under the Act. The Ld.AR has substantiated the pleadings with written ... obtained the mining lease for 20 years period and such expenditure has a enduring benefit and cannot be treated as revenue expenditure as legal expenses and the Ld.DR relied on the order of the CIT(A). 6 ITA. No.37/PAN/2023 R.S.Shetye and Bros. 6. We have heard the rival submissions

Vidyut Employees Co-Operative Housing Society, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1878/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1878/Hyd./2025 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Vidyut Employees Co- The Dcit, Operative Housing Vs. Circle-6(1), Society, Hyderabad. Hyderabad – 500 004. Pin – 500 034. Telangana. Telangana. Pan Aaaav5182H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri Y V Bhanu Narayan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Suresh Babu Kn, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27.02.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri Y V Bhanu Narayan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri Suresh Babu KN, Sr. AR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250

option but to keep the money collected from the members in the bank account with a view to meet the expenditure towards legal expenses to fight the case, development work and to meet day-to-day work expenses. The assessee has earned interest from the fixed deposit made with

Indutch Composites Technology Private Limited, Vadodara vs. Deputy Commissioner Circle 1(1)(1) Vadodara, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1879/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1879/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Indutch Composites The Dy. Cit बनाम/ Technology Private Limited Circle-1(1)(1) V/S. Plot No.187/P/1B-1 Gidc Vadodara – 390 007 Waghodia, Next To Munjal Auto Industries Ltd. Vaghodia, Vadodara – 391 760 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aacci 2331 P (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) ()* यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishit Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/01/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of Office Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/Jcit (A)-1, Nashik, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 04/08/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. Indutch Composites Technology Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit Asst.Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Sr.DR
Section 250

Conveyance Expenses 1,489,894.00 673,737.00 Courier Charges 75,631.00 24,776.00 Job Work Charges 13,467,472.00 7,607,367.00 Legal Expenses 112.510.00 71.400.00 Membership Fees 3,933.00 7,118.00 Miscellaneous Expenditure 71,613.00 60,241.00 Office Expense 194,186.00 231,883.00 Packing Expenses

Zydus Lifesciences Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 392/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Patel, Shri Ajit KumarFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT.DR
Section 153(4)Section 153CSection 35Section 35(1)(i)Section 35(1)(iv)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

behalf of the assessee, being in the nature of insurance ITA No. 392/Ahd/2023 [Zydus Lifesciences Ltd. vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2017-18 - 13 – charges, legal expenses, clinical charges, product registration charges, regulatory fees, conference registration, etc. He stated these transactions to have been undertaken to ensure that business interest ... assessee as the US AE is admittedly, and beyond dispute, only an LRD. The same is the position with respect to the legal expenses. It has been specifically explained by the assessee, and this explanation has not even been called into question, that the US AE was holding

Mala Singh, Howrah vs. I.T.O., Ward - 47(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1317/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 69C

faced severe financial constraints due to the addition of ₹1.28 Crore u/s 69C of the Act which disrupted her ability to arrange funds for legal expenses. In addition to that the assessee was suffering from illness and also took time to obtain certified copies of the appeal order and there

Murli Ram Meena, Income Tax vs. Mohinder Kumar, Prashant Vihar Delhi

ITA 1710/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

ITA No.1710/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 With ITA No.1652/Del/2024 with C.O. No. 22/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Income Tax Officer

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax vs. Mohinder Kumr, Prashant Vihar

ITA 1652/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shuklaassessment Year: 2018-19 With Ita No.1652/Del/2024 With C.O. No. 22/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sh. Mohinder Kumar, Civic Centre, C-3/8, Block-C, Delhi Prasant Vihar, Delhi Pan: Aahpk7777R (Appellant) (Respondent/Cross-Objector) Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Ms. Shilpa Gupta, Ca Sh. Deepesh Garg, Adv. Department By Ms. Amish S. Gupt, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 22.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm The Instant Batch Of Three Cases Pertains To The Single Assessee Herein Sh. Mohinder Kumar. The Revenue & The Assessee Filed Their Respective Appeals Ita No.1652/Del/2024 & C.O. No. 22/Del/2025 For Assessment Year 2021-22 Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal

Section 143(3)

computation shall follow as per law. 7. Learned counsel further seeks to buttress the point that the CIT(A) has disallowed the assessee’s legal expenses of Rs.15 lakhs in assessment year 2021-22 as well. We quote Indwell Construction Vs. CIT (1998) 232 ITR 776 (AP) to conclude that

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Jalco Financial Services Private Limited, New Delhi

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 4209/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveenc Chandraacit, Vs. Jalco Financial Services Room No. 316A, C.R. Private Limited Building, I.P. Estate, K-7B, Ground Floor, New Delhi – 110002 Kalkaji, New Delhi – 110019 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacj2791E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. MayankPatawari, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 15HSection 37Section 37(1)Section 68

P a g e | 1 Jalco Financial Services Pvt. Ltd.(AY: 2017-18) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C

D.C.I.T Cir - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eureka Forbs Ltd, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2037/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

project report or legal opinion regarding the validity of such project. This could not, be considered as capital expenditure as, in that case, any legal expenses incurred by an assessee for taking any opinion on the desirability or feasibility of expansion of the business would not be allowable as deduction ... project report or legal opinion regarding the validity of such project. This could not, be considered as capital expenditure as, in that case, any legal expenses incurred by an assessee for taking any opinion on the desirability or feasibility of expansion of the business would not be allowable as deduction

D.C.I.T Cir - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eureka Forbs Ltd, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1248/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

project report or legal opinion regarding the validity of such project. This could not, be considered as capital expenditure as, in that case, any legal expenses incurred by an assessee for taking any opinion on the desirability or feasibility of expansion of the business would not be allowable as deduction ... project report or legal opinion regarding the validity of such project. This could not, be considered as capital expenditure as, in that case, any legal expenses incurred by an assessee for taking any opinion on the desirability or feasibility of expansion of the business would not be allowable as deduction

D.C.I.T Cir - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eureka Forbs Ltd, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1247/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

project report or legal opinion regarding the validity of such project. This could not, be considered as capital expenditure as, in that case, any legal expenses incurred by an assessee for taking any opinion on the desirability or feasibility of expansion of the business would not be allowable as deduction ... project report or legal opinion regarding the validity of such project. This could not, be considered as capital expenditure as, in that case, any legal expenses incurred by an assessee for taking any opinion on the desirability or feasibility of expansion of the business would not be allowable as deduction

D.C.I.T Cir - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eureka Forbs Ltd, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1246/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

project report or legal opinion regarding the validity of such project. This could not, be considered as capital expenditure as, in that case, any legal expenses incurred by an assessee for taking any opinion on the desirability or feasibility of expansion of the business would not be allowable as deduction ... project report or legal opinion regarding the validity of such project. This could not, be considered as capital expenditure as, in that case, any legal expenses incurred by an assessee for taking any opinion on the desirability or feasibility of expansion of the business would not be allowable as deduction

Lifestyle and Media Holdings Limited, Delhi vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 18(1), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3714/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.3714/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Lifestyle & Media Holding Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known As Ndtv Vs. C.R. Building, Lifestyle Holdings Limited) New Delhi. Plot No.09, Unit No. 055, Ground Floor Capia, Corporate Suites, Jasola, New Delhi-110025. Pan-Aadcn3076F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri R.P. Mall, Adv. Assessee By Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/12/2025 O R D E R [ Per Bench: All The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Delhi [Ld. Cit(A)] For Ay 2014-15 To 1016017 & Having Common Issues, Therefore, They Are Dispose- Off By A Common Order. First, We Taken Assessee Appeal For Ay 2014-15 In Ita No. 64/Del/2019. Ita No.3714/Del/2024 & Lifestyle & Media Holdings Limited Vs. Dci

Section 143(3)Section 2(13)Section 71

which are debited to Profit and Loss Accounts necessary for day to day operations and administration of the company such as Salary, Auditor remuneration, legal expenses and other expenses. He submits that business of the assessee is established and ready to commence thus, it can be said that business

Lifestyle and Media Holding Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-18(1), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 255/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.3714/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Lifestyle & Media Holding Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known As Ndtv Vs. C.R. Building, Lifestyle Holdings Limited) New Delhi. Plot No.09, Unit No. 055, Ground Floor Capia, Corporate Suites, Jasola, New Delhi-110025. Pan-Aadcn3076F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri R.P. Mall, Adv. Assessee By Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/12/2025 O R D E R [ Per Bench: All The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Delhi [Ld. Cit(A)] For Ay 2014-15 To 1016017 & Having Common Issues, Therefore, They Are Dispose- Off By A Common Order. First, We Taken Assessee Appeal For Ay 2014-15 In Ita No. 64/Del/2019. Ita No.3714/Del/2024 & Lifestyle & Media Holdings Limited Vs. Dci

Section 143(3)Section 2(13)Section 71

which are debited to Profit and Loss Accounts necessary for day to day operations and administration of the company such as Salary, Auditor remuneration, legal expenses and other expenses. He submits that business of the assessee is established and ready to commence thus, it can be said that business

Lifestyle and Media Holding Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-18(1), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 64/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.3714/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Lifestyle & Media Holding Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known As Ndtv Vs. C.R. Building, Lifestyle Holdings Limited) New Delhi. Plot No.09, Unit No. 055, Ground Floor Capia, Corporate Suites, Jasola, New Delhi-110025. Pan-Aadcn3076F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri R.P. Mall, Adv. Assessee By Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/12/2025 O R D E R [ Per Bench: All The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Delhi [Ld. Cit(A)] For Ay 2014-15 To 1016017 & Having Common Issues, Therefore, They Are Dispose- Off By A Common Order. First, We Taken Assessee Appeal For Ay 2014-15 In Ita No. 64/Del/2019. Ita No.3714/Del/2024 & Lifestyle & Media Holdings Limited Vs. Dci

Section 143(3)Section 2(13)Section 71

which are debited to Profit and Loss Accounts necessary for day to day operations and administration of the company such as Salary, Auditor remuneration, legal expenses and other expenses. He submits that business of the assessee is established and ready to commence thus, it can be said that business

Pravinsinh Bhawansinh Vaghela, Gandhinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 829/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Srivastava, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 54BSection 54FSection 68

Appeals) held that only the cost reflected in the registered sale deeds, along with stamp duty, registration charges and related legal expenses, could be considered as “purchase” for the purposes of section 54B of the Act. Accordingly, while rejecting the assessee’s claim

Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 786/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 784, 785 & 786/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2012-13, 2017-18 & 2020-21 Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Vs The Ito, #359, Sector 9-D, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "ायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Afrpt6944G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Assessee Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(13)Section 37Section 44ASection 56(1)

hence the invocation of 44AD by assessee was not appropriate. Hence this ground is decided against the assessee . 11. Ground No. 2: Deductibility of Legal Expenses. Since the income is classified as "Income from Other Sources," deductions are governed by Section 57(iii), which allows expenditure laid out wholly ... exclusively for the purpose of making or earning such income. The legal expenses incurred by the Assessee relate to the recovery of old contract dues and to the firm/company's disputes. These expenses do not have a direct nexus with the earning of interest from the Bank Fixed Deposits

Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 785/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 784, 785 & 786/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2012-13, 2017-18 & 2020-21 Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Vs The Ito, #359, Sector 9-D, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "ायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Afrpt6944G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Assessee Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(13)Section 37Section 44ASection 56(1)

hence the invocation of 44AD by assessee was not appropriate. Hence this ground is decided against the assessee . 11. Ground No. 2: Deductibility of Legal Expenses. Since the income is classified as "Income from Other Sources," deductions are governed by Section 57(iii), which allows expenditure laid out wholly ... exclusively for the purpose of making or earning such income. The legal expenses incurred by the Assessee relate to the recovery of old contract dues and to the firm/company's disputes. These expenses do not have a direct nexus with the earning of interest from the Bank Fixed Deposits

Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 784/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 784, 785 & 786/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2012-13, 2017-18 & 2020-21 Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Vs The Ito, #359, Sector 9-D, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "ायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Afrpt6944G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Assessee Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(13)Section 37Section 44ASection 56(1)

hence the invocation of 44AD by assessee was not appropriate. Hence this ground is decided against the assessee . 11. Ground No. 2: Deductibility of Legal Expenses. Since the income is classified as "Income from Other Sources," deductions are governed by Section 57(iii), which allows expenditure laid out wholly ... exclusively for the purpose of making or earning such income. The legal expenses incurred by the Assessee relate to the recovery of old contract dues and to the firm/company's disputes. These expenses do not have a direct nexus with the earning of interest from the Bank Fixed Deposits

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Sambalpur vs. Smt. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 182/CTK/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Bhadra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM