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)

Ramakant Bhuvan, Khopoli, Raigad vs. ITO, Ward 4, Panvel

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 24/PUN/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 May 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.24/Pun/2026 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Ramakant Bhuvan, Vs. Ito, Ward-4, Panvel. Radha Niwas, Shivaji Chowk, Shilphata, Khalapur, Raigad, Khopoli, Raigad- 410203. Pan : Aaqfr7951M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kirit Sheth & Shri Vijay Jain Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Gawali Date Of Hearing 12.03.2026 : Date Of Pronouncement 11.05.2026 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 31.12.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Ground 3 - The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Sustaining The Disallowance Of Purchases Without Properly Appreciating Various Documents Furnished Before Him I.E. (A) Purchase Invoices (B) Excise Transport Permits (Form Fl - 1A) (C) Stock Register (D) Quantitative Details Certified By The Tax Auditor In Form 3Cd (E) Suppliers Ledger Account Confirmation. Your Appellant Respectfully Submits That Disallowance Of Purchase From Five Vendors Is Not Called For On Proper Appreciation Of The Above Documents.

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Sheth &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali
Section 133Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

Landmark Worldwide Breakthrough Technologies Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1303/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Landmark Worldwide Deputy Commissioner Of Income Breakthrough Technologies Tax Pvt. Ltd. Circle 14(1)(1) Unit 2, 1St Floor, Neptune Mumbai Uptown, N.S. Road Vs. Opp. Post Office Mulund West Mumbai – 400080 (Pan: Aabcl3749N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Akshay J. Shah, Ca Revenue : Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025- 26/1083971307(1), Dated 22.12.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Assessment Unit, U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 31.05.2023, For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Sole Issue Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal By Taking As Many As Eight Grounds Of Appeal Relates To Disallowance Of Deduction Claimed U/S 80G In Respect Of Donation Made To The Prime Minister’S National Relief Fund (Pmnrf), Made Out Of The Corporate Social Responsibility (Csr) Fund/Expenses. Contents Of The Grounds Are More In The Nature Of Peripheral Arguments On The Sole Issue Contested By The Assessee In This Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Akshay J. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 37(1)Section 80GSection 80G(2)(iiihk)Section 80G(2)(iiihl)