← All Phrases

“Section 37(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 37Section 37(1)4,308 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 37(1) is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), cited in 2,118 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 37(1)

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT
402 ITR 640 · 2018 · Supreme Court
1,596
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A is not automatic and requires the Assessing Officer to record satisfaction before applying Rule 8D. Only investments yielding exempt income are considered for disallowance, irrespective of their strategic nature.

Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT
378 ITR 33 · 2015 · High Court
1,569
citing judgments

A disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income cannot be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the relevant previous year.

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · Supreme Court
1,392
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI deposited by an employer beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective special Acts are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such disallowance can be made during processing under section 143(1).

CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.
366 ITR 505 · 2014 · High Court
1,261
citing judgments

When an assessee possesses interest-free funds sufficient to cover investments yielding tax-free income, it is presumed that such investments were made from these interest-free funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT
328 ITR 81 · 2010 · High Court
1,183
citing judgments

Rule 8D, for computing disallowance under Section 14A for expenses related to exempt income, applies from Assessment Year 2008-09 onwards; for prior years, a reasonable disallowance must be made. The disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned.

CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.
312 ITR 254 · 2009 · Supreme Court
968
citing judgments

Foreign exchange fluctuations, whether gains or losses, are inextricably linked to the underlying business transaction and must be accounted for under the mercantile system. The Supreme Court also affirmed the standard accounting principle of valuing stock at cost or net realisable value, whichever is lower.

Judgments citing Section 37(1)

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. G4S Securities System India Pvt Ltd

ITA - 765 / 2011HC Delhi11 Jul 2011
Section 143(3)

technical knowhow and the trade mark. Hence, the expenditure incurred by the assessee as royalty is revenue expenditure and is therefore, relatable under Section 37(1) of the Act. We thus, answer the question in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue and consequently dismiss all the three appeals

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. G4S Securities System India Pvt Ltd

ITA - 763 / 2011HC Delhi11 Jul 2011
Section 143(3)

technical knowhow and the trade mark. Hence, the expenditure incurred by the assessee as royalty is revenue expenditure and is therefore, relatable under Section 37(1) of the Act. We thus, answer the question in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue and consequently dismiss all the three appeals

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. G4S Securities System India Pvt Ltd

ITA - 1943 / 2010HC Delhi11 Jul 2011
Section 143(3)

technical knowhow and the trade mark. Hence, the expenditure incurred by the assessee as royalty is revenue expenditure and is therefore, relatable under Section 37(1) of the Act. We thus, answer the question in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue and consequently dismiss all the three appeals

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Cargill Global Trading Pvt Ltd

ITA - 331 / 2011HC Delhi17 Feb 2011
Section 195Section 2Section 37(1)Section 40

Invoked the provisions of Section 40(a)(i) of the Act and disallowed the sum of ?3.97 Crores claimed by the assessee under Section 37(1) of the Act. 3. CIT (A) deleted the addition holding that the discount paid by the assessee to CFSA cannot be held ... exported and bills are drawn by the assessee. It is the said discounted charges which were claimed by the assessee as expenses under Section 37(1) of the Act. The discounting facilities offered by the CFSA to the assessee after charging its aforesaid discounted commission are not questioned

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd

ITA - 346 / 2009HC Delhi29 Nov 2010
Section 37(1)

appeal preferred by the assessee holding that this liability provided by the assessee was of a contingent nature and was not allowable under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟). 5. Not satisfied with the view taken by the AO as well

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Curls & Curves India Ltd

ITA - 1093 / 2008HC Delhi29 Oct 2010

Investment Corporation Ltd. v. CIT reported in [1997]225ITR802(SC) . According to the Law and Practice of Income Tax by Kanga and Palkhivala, Section 37(1) is a residuary section extending the allowance to items of business expenditure not covered by Sections 30 to 36. This Section, according ... which profits or gains are computed under Section 28/29. That is why in deciding the question as to whether the word "expenditure" in Section 37(1) includes the word "loss" one has to read Section 37(1) with Section 28, Section 29 and Section 145(1). One more principle needs

P.C.Bhandari & Co vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA - 1272 / 2008HC Delhi14 Dec 2009
Section 14ASection 71

would not be any expenditure incurred. Test of commercial expediency would be applicable to Section 57 (iii) as well as it applies to Section 37(1) as held by Supreme Court in Eastern Investments Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, 20 ITR 1. In case it is found that

CIT vs. Delhi Brass & Metal Works Ltd

In the result, the impugned judgment of the Tribunal is set aside

ITA - 653 / 2007HC Delhi21 Nov 2008
For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata BansalFor Respondent: None
Section 143Section 260ASection 80

provisions relating to business by allowing expenditure by way of interest which bears a nexus with the interest receipt. The computation provisions include section 37(1) under which any expenditure incurred or laid wholly and 2008:DHC:3093-DB ITA No. 653 of 2007 Page 10 of 11 exclusively