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)

ACIT, Cuttack vs. M/S. Om Oil & Flour Mills Ltd., Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 169/CTK/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.169/Ctk/2015 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Acit, Circle-2(1), Cuttack Vs. M/S Om Oil & Floor Mills Ltd., Type-Ii/8, New Industrial Estate, Khapuria, Madhupatna, Cuttack. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco 9728 L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Pradhan, Dr धनधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/07/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 05/07/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 27.01.2015 In I.T.Appeal No.0358/2013-14, Wherein The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :- 01. Whether In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. First Appellate Authority Is Justified In Deleting The Quantum Of Addition/Disallowances Made By The Ao Under The Different Heads Of Account Under The Administrative Expenses Such As I) Ruchi Prativa Sanmman Samaroha Rs. 18,94,847/- Ii) Ruchi Baliyatra Function: Rs.6,80,087/- Iii) Advertisement Expenses: Rs.7,22,344 - Without Assigning Any Specific Reasons - Where As In Absence Of Supporting Evidences, The Claim Of The Assessee Could Not Be Accepted As Genuine. 02.Whether In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld.First Appellate Authority Is Justified In Deleting The Additions Made By The Ao Under The Head 'Admn. Expenses' Where Assessee Failed To Substantiate The Genuineness Of Various Expenditure Claimed In The P&L Account In View Of The Decision Of Hon'Ble Itat Chennai Bench ‘A' In The Case Of K.J.Prabhakar Vrs Acit In Ita No.703(Mds) Of 2010 Dated 08.07.2011 Which Has Upheld That An Estimated 25% Of Expenditure On Travelling, Conveyance, Telephone, Mobile, Vehicle Maintenance Was Justified.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

ACIT, Bhubaneswar vs. Orissa Power Transmission Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 91/CTK/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.91/Ctk/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Vs. Orissa Power Bhubaneswar Transmission Corporation Limited, Janapath, Bhubaneswar स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco 7873 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Pradhan, Dr ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.V.Rao, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/06/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28/06/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 26.12.2014, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0297/14-15, Wherein The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :- 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Law As Well As On Facts By Deleting Additions Of Rs.28,74,375/- Under The Head Other Expenses (Prior Period Expenses) & Of Rs.34,94,615 Under The Head Employee Cost (Prior Period Expenses). 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law In Not Accepting The Examination Of Findings Made By The Ao On The Issues. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Public Limited Company Of Odisha State & Is Engaged In The Business Of Transmission Of Power & Filed The Return Of Income Electronically On 24.09.2009

For Appellant: Shri P.V.Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 37(1)