Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 37(1) is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), cited in 2,118 of the 6,995 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

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.

Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT
193 ITR 321 · 1992 · Supreme Court
1,695
citing judgments

The principle of consistency applies in tax matters, meaning a fundamental aspect found to be true in one assessment year should not be changed in a subsequent year if the order was not challenged.

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.

CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd.
358 ITR 295 · 2013 · Supreme Court
935
citing judgments

When an income or expenditure is revenue neutral across different assessment years, where any benefit derived is offset by a corresponding liability or reversal, no additional tax liability arises, particularly concerning income recognition under the mercantile system of accounting.

Judgments on Section 37(1)

DCIT Central 2(1), Chennai vs. M/S Agni Estates&Foundation Pvt.Ltd, Chennai

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 356/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.355/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.356/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit M/S. Agni Estates & Foundations Pvt.Ltd, बनाम/ Central Circle-2(1) 76, Temple Towers, North Mada Street, Vs. Chennai-34. Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-7990-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)- Ld. Dr !"थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20-10-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Years (Ay) 2013-14 & 2014-15 Arises Out Of Common Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, [Cit(A)] On 31.01.2023 In The Matter Of Separate Assessments Framed By The Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S 143(3) Of The Act. The Facts As Well As Issues Are Common. The Grounds Raised By Revenue In Ay 2013-14 Read As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)- Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld.AR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

DCIT Central 2(1), Chennai vs. M/S Agni Estates&Foundation Pvt.Ltd, Chennai

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 355/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.355/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.356/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit M/S. Agni Estates & Foundations Pvt.Ltd, बनाम/ Central Circle-2(1) 76, Temple Towers, North Mada Street, Vs. Chennai-34. Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-7990-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)- Ld. Dr !"थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20-10-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Years (Ay) 2013-14 & 2014-15 Arises Out Of Common Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, [Cit(A)] On 31.01.2023 In The Matter Of Separate Assessments Framed By The Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S 143(3) Of The Act. The Facts As Well As Issues Are Common. The Grounds Raised By Revenue In Ay 2013-14 Read As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)- Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld.AR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

Sri Nirmal Chandra Padhiary, Balasore vs. ACIT, Balasore Circle, Balasore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 157/CTK/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.157/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Sri Nirmal Chandra Padhiary, Vs Acit, Balasore Circle, Balasore Bampada, Chhanpur, Birla Tyre Road, Balasore-756056 Pan No. :Acupp 0872 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mr. Somanath Sahoo, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 25.01.2023 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1049108098(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Time Barred By 35 Days. In This Regard, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Has Filed An Application Along With Affidavit Of The Assessee For Condonation Of The Delay, To Which The Ld. Sr. Dr Has Not Raised Any Serious Objection To Condone The Delay. On Perusal Of The Application & The Affidavit Of The Assessee, We Found That The Delay Occurred Due To Bonafide Reasons. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay Of 35 Days In Filing The Appeal & Appeal Is Disposed Off Finally. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That Two Additions Are Challenged In This Appeal, One Is Against The Disallowance Of Pf & Esi Paid Belatedly

For Appellant: Shri Mr. Somanath Sahoo, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B