Section 43B(f) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.37

Section 43B(f) falls under section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 37 (Certain deductions allowed on actual payment basis only) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 37 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 43B(f) is Exide Industries Ltd. v. Union of India (292 ITR 470), cited in 320 of the 216 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 43B(f)

Exide Industries Ltd. v. Union of India
292 ITR 470 · 2007 · High Court
320
citing judgments

The Calcutta High Court held that restricting deduction for leave encashment via Section 43B(f) was arbitrary and contrary to Supreme Court decisions. However, this judgment was later stayed by the Supreme Court.

CIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd.
280 ITR 525 · 2006 · High Court
67
citing judgments

When an assessee has both borrowed funds and sufficient interest-free own funds, and makes interest-free advances, it is presumed that the advances were made from the own funds, and no interest disallowance is made under Section 36(1)(iii) on the borrowed funds.

CIT v. Gujarat Reclaim & Rubber Products Ltd.
383 ITR 236 · 2016 · High Court
42
citing judgments

Income that accrues or arises abroad is not deemed to accrue or arise in India, even if there is a business connection in India, clarifying the scope of taxability for non-residents.

PCIT v. Ferromatic Milacron India Private Limited
99 Taxmann.com 154 · 2018 · High Court
29
citing judgments

A non-compete fee is an eligible business or commercial right for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, similar to copyrights and patents.

CIT v. Angelique International Ltd.
359 ITR 9 · 2013 · High Court
21
citing judgments

The provided passages only cite CIT v. Angelique International Ltd. as a precedent without detailing the specific legal proposition it stands for. Therefore, the holding cannot be determined from this information alone.

Srikakollu Subba Rao & Co. and Ors. v. Union of India and Other
173 ITR 708 · 1988 · High Court
19
citing judgments

For the provisions of Section 43B to apply, not only must a liability to pay tax or duty be incurred in the accounting year, but the amount must also be statutorily "payable" in that year. A deduction is allowable for liabilities that have accrued but not yet become payable under the relevant law.

Akzo Nobel India Limited v. DCIT
71 Taxmann.com 57 · 2016 · ITAT
18
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must first accept the arm's length price (ALP) declared by the assessee for international transactions with associated enterprises. Rejection of the declared ALP is an exception, requiring specific conditions to be met, such as those prescribed under section 92CA(3).

Sunanda Ram Deka v. CIT
210 ITR 988 · 1994 · High Court
16
citing judgments

A revised return can only be filed under Section 139(5) if there is an omission or a wrong statement in the original return due to bona fide inadvertence or mistake.

(i) CIT v. Model Exims Kanpur
358 ITR 72 · 2013 · High Court
16
citing judgments

The court considers the addition made in the hands of the assessee as business income based on advertisement and subscription revenue.

Agricultural Produce Market Committee v. CIT
301 ITR 1 · 2008 · ITAT
15
citing judgments

Software expenses are revenue in nature and allowable as business expenses, particularly when following established judicial precedents and principles laid down by Special Benches of the Tribunal.

Judgments on Section 43B(f)

Sjvn Limited, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh vs. DCIT/ACIT Circle, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh

Appeal stand allowed which makes argument of debatable issue infructuous one

ITA 1187/CHANDI/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1187/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2023-24) Sjvn Limited Dcit/Acit Circle Shanan, Malyana बनाम/ Vs. Railway Board Buolding Shimla (Hp) -171006 The Mall, Shimla - 171003 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaics-1307-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Ved Jain (Advocate) – Ld. Ar (Virtual) ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.05.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2023-24 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Addl. / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi [Cit(A)] Dated 27.07.2025 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S 143(1) On 27.03.2024 Making Certain Adjustments To The Returned Income. Besides Regular Grounds, The Assessee Has Also Filed Additional Grounds Of Appeal. In Sum & Substance, The Grievance Of The Assessee Is Two-Fold I.E., (I) Adjustment

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain (Advocate) – Ld. AR (Virtual)For Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(1)Section 43B