Section 41 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.38

Section 41 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 38 (Certain sums deemed as profits and gains of business or profession) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 38 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 41 is CIT v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. (410 ITR 244), cited in 63 of the 156 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 41

CIT v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd.
410 ITR 244 · 2019 · Supreme Court
63
citing judgments
Sedco Forex International Inc. v. CIT
399 ITR 1 · 2017 · Supreme Court
29
citing judgments

Section 44BB, which provides for presumptive taxation of profits and gains of business in the case of exploration of mineral oils, does not override the provisions of Sections 5, 9, or 90 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. For business profits to be taxed in India, the existence of a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India must be established by the Revenue.

CIT v. Edward Keventer (P.) Ltd.
115 ITR 149 · 1978 · Supreme Court
28
citing judgments

When assessing expenses under Section 40A(2), tax authorities must consider the entire position judiciously from the viewpoint of a prudent businessman, not arbitrarily or capriciously. The revenue must demonstrate tax evasion and cannot disallow expenses if the recipient is taxed at the same or higher rate.

Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax
2024 SCC OnLine SC 2877 · 2024 · Reported
21
citing judgments

Banks can claim tax deductions for broken period interest on Held to Maturity (HTM) government securities if classified as stock-in-trade, treating it as revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure.

M/S Novozymes South Asia Put Ltd. v. ACIT
168 ITD 529 · 2018 · ITAT
10
citing judgments

The ITAT Mumbai in M/S Novozymes South Asia Put Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) has allowed employee stock option plans (ESOPs) as a deduction, recognizing them as an effective tool for employee reward and retention.

CIT v. Bhagat Shyam & Co.
188 ITR 608 · 1991 · High Court
10
citing judgments

For a revision under Section 263 to be valid, the Commissioner must independently apply their mind to the material placed before them and be satisfied that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, even if the Assessing Officer brought the material to their notice.

Smt. Sumitra Devi Khirwal v. CIT
84 ITR 26 · 1972 · High Court
10
citing judgments

Revision proceedings under section 263 are valid even when the Commissioner acts on records placed before him, rather than calling for them himself.

CIT v. Enron Oil & Gaspat Services Inc., Dehradun
29 Taxmann.com 419 · 2013 · High Court
6
citing judgments
HC) 114 ITA.No.4351 & 4457/Del./2018 L & T SUCG JV CC 27, New Delhi. (ii) Raghubir Singh v. DCIT
16 Taxmann.com 262 · 2011 · High Court
5
citing judgments
(i) Qualcomm Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd. v. CIT(A)
174 Taxmann.com 592 · 2025 · High Court
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 41

Arun Kumar Bose, Siliguri vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 465/KOL/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.465/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Arun Kumar Bose................................................................................…..…Appellant 9, Rajani Kant Sarani, Hakimpara, Siliguri. [Pan: Ahvpb8055A] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Siliguri...…..…...........................................…....…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ananda Sen, Adv. & S. Mandal, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P.P Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 9Th, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.11.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 58 Days. An Application For Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed, Wherein, It Has Been Mentioned That The Appellant Is A Senior Citizen & Was Effected By Covid & Therefore, Could Not File The Appeal In Time. Considering The Averments Made In The Application, The Delay In Filing The Present Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing.

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

A.C.I.T., Circle-26(1), Kolkata vs. Shri Debashis Roy, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 226/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 226/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income, Shri Debashis Roy Circle – 26(1), Kolkata Vill – Vijayganj Bazar Vs P.O. Bhangar 24, Paraganas (South) P.S. Kashipur Pin - 743502 Pan : Aoppr3859H अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, A/R Revenue By : Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 7, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 19/11/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Issue Raised In Ground Nos. 1 & 2 Is Against The Deletion Of An Addition Of Rs. 4,19,07,168/- By The Ld. Cit(A) Which Was Added By The Assessing Officer U/S 68 Of The Act To The Income Of The Assesse On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit Received During The Year.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. PujaFor Respondent: Shri Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 68