Section 30 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.28

Section 30 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 28 (Rent, rates, taxes, repairs and insurance) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 28 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 30 is ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. v. CIT (343 ITR 89), cited in 144 of the 167 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.

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
40
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

Disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) for payments to a US resident is not permissible if it imposes harsher conditions than those applicable to payments made to an Indian resident, due to the non-discrimination clause in the India-US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA).

CIT v. Oxford University Press
108 ITR 166 · 1977 · High Court
24
citing judgments

Expenditure on repairs is revenue in nature if it preserves or maintains an existing asset, rather than creating a new asset or advantage. The duration of the benefit from repairs does not determine if the expenditure is capital.

CIT v. Ramaraji Surgical Cotton Mills
294 ITR 328 · 2007 · Supreme Court
24
citing judgments

The High Court's direction to the CIT(Appeals) to consider specific Supreme Court judgments implies that cases may be decided on merits by appellate authorities based on relevant precedents without necessarily remanding them to the Assessing Officer.

Alubound Dacs India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
163 Taxmann.com 536 · 2024 · ITAT
24
citing judgments

Expenditure on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities is an allowable deduction under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, provided the conditions stipulated in section 80G are met, irrespective of being part of CSR expenditure.

Judgments on Section 30

Star India Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst.C.I.T.-Range 11(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1112/MUM/2009[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2004-2005

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1112/Mum/2009,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2004-05 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Star India Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Range-11(1) Star House, Opp. Dr. E’Moses Road Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mahalaxmi,Mumbai-400 011. Pan:Aaacn 1335 Q आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1370 /Mum/2009,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2004-05 वष" Acit, Range-11(1) M/S. Star India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M.K. Marg,Mumbai-400 020. Star House, Mahalaxmi,Mumbai-400 011. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri N.K. Chand-Cit Assessee By: S/Shri Porus Kaka & Divesh Chawla सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04.05.2016 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 25.05.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम,1961 की धारा 254(1)के अ"ग"त आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद" राजे" के अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- Challenging The Order,Dtd.12/11/2008,Of Cit(A)-Xxxii,Mumbai,The Assessee & The Assessing Officer(Ao) Have Filed Cross Appeals For The Above Mentioned Ay. Assessee-Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Producing/ Procuring Television Programmes & Supplying Them To Overseas Media Companies.It Also Acts As An Agent For Advertisement Sales For Overseas Media Companies & Carries On Channel Subscription Business.It Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.10.2004,Declaring Total Income At Rs.42,79,81,700/-.The Ao Completed The Assessment On 28/12/2006, U/S. 143(3) Of The Act,Determining Its Income At Rs.311.49 Crores.

For Appellant: S/Shri Porus Kaka & Divesh ChawlaFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand-CIT
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 37Section 80H

DCIT 4(1), Mumbai vs. Hdfc Securities Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3137/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Ram Lal Negiआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.3137/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2010-11 Dcit-4(1) M/S. Hdfc Securities Limited Room No.640, 6Th Floor Office Floor 8, Alpha Bldg.-B, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. I Techno Think Campus, Mumbai-400 020. Kanjur Marg, Mumbai-400 042. Pan:Aaach 8215 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.Ita No.3502/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2010-11 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Hdfc Securities Limited Dcit-4(1) Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Yogesh Thar-Ar राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri B.D. Naik-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17.02.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.02.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम,1961 क" धारा 254(1)के अ"तग"त आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) खंडपीठ खंडपीठ केकेकेके अनुसार खंडपीठ खंडपीठ अनुसार अनुसार Per Bench, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order,Dated 06.02.2014 Of Cit(A)-8,Mumbai The Assessee & The Assessing Officer(Ao)Have Filed Cross-Appeals.Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Share Broking & Share Trading,Filed Its Return Of Income On 13.10. 2011, Declaring Total Income At Rs. 124.66 Crores.The Ao Completed The Assessment, U/S 143(3) Of The Act,On 23.02.2013,Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.127.91 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar-ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Naik-DR
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 194JSection 254(1)Section 40