← All Phrases

“proximate nexus”

Judicial DoctrinesReopening / 147Reopening / 147134 judgments

The decision most relied on for proximate nexus is PCIT v. M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (417 ITR 334), cited in 96 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on proximate nexus

PCIT v. M/s. Kesoram Industries 57
417 ITR 334 · 2019 · High Court
96
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must establish a proximate nexus between the expenditure to be disallowed and the investments made. The Assessing Officer must record satisfaction before making disallowance under Section 14A and must not proceed on mere suspicion.

CIT v. Samtel Color Ltd.
326 ITR 425 · 2010 · High Court
63
citing judgments

Corporate club membership fees, including admission and subscription fees, incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes to improve business relations and prospects, are allowable as revenue expenditure. This principle applies when there is a proximate nexus between the expenditure and the business.

CIT v. RPG Transmissions Ltd.
48 Taxmann.com 57 · 2014 · High Court
56
citing judgments

Interest expenditure under Section 36(1)(iii) is deductible for borrowed funds invested for business purposes, even if the investment does not immediately generate income, provided there is a proximate nexus to the assessee's business.

Ramchandar Shivnarayan v. CIT
111 ITR 263 · 1978 · Supreme Court
48
citing judgments

A business loss is deductible if it has a direct and proximate nexus with business operations or is incidental to them, applying a commercial standard, even without an explicit statutory provision for its deduction.

CIT v. Textool Co. Ltd.
135 ITR 200 · 1982 · High Court
48
citing judgments

A loss is deductible as a business loss only if it arises during the course of or is incidental to business operations, requiring a direct and proximate nexus with the business. If profits from an activity are taxable, losses from it are deductible.

PCIT v. Hindusthan Aeronautics Ltd.
143 Taxmann.com 357 · 2022 · High Court
43
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must establish a proximate nexus between the expenditure and the investments before invoking Section 14A(2) and Rule 8D for disallowance. Failure to do so renders the invocation illegal and the addition liable for deletion.

Seth R. Dalmia v. CIT
110 ITR 644 · 1977 · Supreme Court
40
citing judgments

An indirect connection between expenditure and income can be sufficient to establish the required nexus for deductibility under Section 57(iii). The connection need not be direct.

CITVs T.S. HajeeMoosa& Co. (Mad) 153 ITR 422; Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. v. CIT(Kar)
122 ITR 839 · 1980 · High Court
28
citing judgments

Expenditure must be solely for promoting business to qualify for deduction under Section 37. The assessee bears the burden to prove expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes.

Judgments citing proximate nexus

ACIT Spl. Range-7, New Delhi vs. Prudent-Agri Commodities India Private Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue partly allowed

ITA 1743/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Y.: 2014-15 Acit, Special Range-7, Prudent Agri Commodities C.R. Building, New Delhi Vs India Pvt. Ltd., (Earlier M/S Sunder Agri Commodities India Pvt. Ltd.) 68/2, Rnm Centre, Janpath New Delhi – 110 001 (Pan: Aascs3922N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv., Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv., Sh. Sumit Lal Chandani, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Yadav, Adv. Department By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025 Order Per Shamim Yahya, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-Xxv, New Delhi Dated 21.12.2018 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Company E-Filed Its Return Of Income For Ay 2014-15 On 26.11.2014 Declaring An Income Of Rs. 1,06,26,080/- The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment Under Cass & Statutory Notice U/S. 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued On 28.08.2015. Thereafter, Notice Under Section 142(1) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Was Issued On 06.06.2016 & 12.09.2016

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 10(35)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 37

mutual funds, the same cannot be treated to have been received for the purpose of investment in mutual funds. Meaning thereby, there is no proximate nexus between the advances received and investment made in the mutual funds yielding tax exempt income and in these circumstances, foreign exchange loss suffered