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)

Shiv Biri Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Murshidabad vs. ACIT, Cir.-42, Murshidabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2340/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 2340/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shiv Biri Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Collegepara, Aurangabad Tax, Circle-42, Murshidabad Vs Murshidabad - 742201 [Pan : Aagcs2376E] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Mita Rizvi Revenue By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/09/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 24/07/2019, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Passing The Order Appealed Against Sustaining & Confirming The Additions Made In The Assessment Order On Account Of 'Undisclosed Cash & Stock Amounted To Rs. 1,00,35,509/- Without Considering The Facts Of The Case In Proper Perspective. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.4,00,000/- On Account Of Payment Of Interest On Demand Vat 3. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Sustaining The Additions Of Rs.1,00,35,509/- Under The Head 'Undisclosed Cash & Stock' Land Rs.4,00,000/- Interest On Demand Vat Respectively. 4. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Urge Such Other Ground Or Grounds Before Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Mita RizviFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT D/R
Section 143(2)Section 250

Parry Phytoremedies Private Limited, (E.I.D. Parry India Limited), Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 4, Pune

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 20/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.20/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Parry Phytoremedies Private Limited (Now Known As E.I.D. Parry (India) Limited) S.No.73/2, Shivane Industrial Estate, Warje, Nda Rd, Nr Agarwal Godown, Pune – 411023 Pan: Aaccp9589J . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 4, Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. A. Gundecha Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 03/11/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10/11/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 01/02/2018 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Ascended Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 24/02/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 4, Pune [For Short “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2013-14. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 17

For Appellant: Shri S. A. GundechaFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37