Section 30 of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 30 is ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. v. CIT (343 ITR 89), cited in 144 of the 112 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 30

ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. v. CIT
343 ITR 89 · 2012 · Supreme Court
144
citing judgments

For calculation of deduction under Section 80HHC, if total interest is netted off after adjusting interest paid and received, the 90% reduction specified in Explanation (baa) is not applicable.

Hero Cycles (P.) Ltd. v. CIT
63 Taxmann.com 308 · 2015 · Supreme Court
96
citing judgments

Interest paid on borrowed funds advanced to group concerns is an allowable expense under section 36(1)(iii) if the advances are made for commercial expediency. Revenue authorities cannot question a businessman's commercial judgment or disallow such expenses on that basis.

General Insurance Corporation of India v. CIT
240 ITR 139 · 1999 · Supreme Court
61
citing judgments

Rule 5(a) of the First Schedule to the Income Tax Act applies to add back an amount only if it is an expenditure or allowance contemplated in sections 30 to 43A and is specifically disallowed. Without such a specific prohibition, amounts like provisions for preference share redemption or amortization cannot be added back to an insurance company's profits.

CIT v. Sri Mangayarkarasi Mills (P) Ltd.
315 ITR 114 · 2009 · Supreme Court
48
citing judgments

Expenditure qualifies as 'current repairs' if it maintains existing machinery without replacement, creates no new asset, restores functional efficiency without increasing capacity, and is not an independent unit. Conversely, the cost of replacing machinery, especially independent units, constitutes capital expenditure.

Lord Thankerton in Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand
6 ITR 636 · 1938 · Reported
44
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business is deductible, even if it is unremunerative or does not yield an immediate profit. The absence of a corresponding receipt does not negate the deductibility of such an expense.

CIT v. Hi Line Pens Pvt. Ltd.
306 ITR 182 · 2008 · High Court
35
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred on improvements like flooring, partition, wiring, and false ceiling in existing premises is treated as revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure, even if it provides some lasting benefit. Such expenses are deductible if made for efficiently carrying on the business.

Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT
194 ITR 294 · 1992 · Supreme Court
35
citing judgments

If the actual cost of an asset was wrongly assessed in earlier years, it can be recomputed and corrected in subsequent assessment years. Interest incurred before production on borrowed money for plant construction can be capitalized and added to the cost of fixed assets.

CIT v. Herbalife International India (P.) Ltd.
384 ITR 276 · 2016 · High Court
25
citing judgments
CIT v. Oxford University Press
108 ITR 166 · 1977 · High Court
24
citing judgments
CIT v. Ramaraji Surgical Cotton Mills
294 ITR 328 · 2007 · Supreme Court
24
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 30

Showing 120 of 112 · Page 1 of 6