THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

gains of business or profession”. It is not the case of assessee that the expenditure incurred by them is covered by Sections 30 to 36 of the Act, and even if that was so the question of allowing the expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act would not arise. 18. In our opinion, the expenditure towards the religious funds

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S JAY MINERALS

Bench: KRISHNA S.DIXIT,PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee), laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business or professions shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession”. (c) The Explanation added by the Parliament to sub-section (1) of Section 37 vide Finance (No.2

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI.M. ABDUL ZAHID

Bench: KRISHNA S.DIXIT,PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee), laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business or professions shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession”. (c) The Explanation added by the Parliament to sub-section (1) of Section 37 vide Finance (No.2

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI.M ABDUL ZAHID

Bench: KRISHNA S.DIXIT,PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee), laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business or professions shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession”. (c) The Explanation added by the Parliament to sub-section (1) of Section 37 vide Finance (No.2