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

Where commission paid to a non-resident agent is not incurred in India, tax is not required to be deducted at source from such commission.

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

Payments made to non-resident agents for export business carried out outside India, where the agents do not have a permanent establishment in India, are not income deemed to accrue or arise in India. Consequently, Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) under Section 195 is not required.

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

Payments made to foreign agents for services rendered outside India are not subject to TDS in India if they are not characterized as Fees for Technical Services (FTS) or do not constitute income arising in India. The assessee can rely on CBDT circulars in force at the time of payment.

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

The definition of 'charitable purpose' under Section 2(15) includes advancement of any object of general public utility, and the scope of 'public utility' depends on the context of each situation.

Judgments on Section 43B(f)

Second Vivekananda Bridge Tollywayco.Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-2(2), Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed accordingly

ITA 19/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2012-13 Second Vivekananda V/S. Dcit, Circle-2(2), Bridge Tollway Co. Pvt. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Ltd., Block Gp, Sector-V, Chowringhee Square, Salt Lake Electronics Kolkata-69 Complex, Kolkata-91 [Pan No.Aahcs 8573 Q] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri S. Rudra, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri G. Hangshing, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 21-06-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 11-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Calls Into Question The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolkata’S Order Dated 04.11.2016 Passed In Case No.1221/Cit(A)-1/C-2(2)/2015-16 Upholding Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing Its Depreciation Claimed Of ₹41,99,22,054 In Respect Of Licence To Collect The Toll Revenue Of The Second Vivekananda Bridge (Treated As The Relevant Intangible Asset) & Disallowing Leave Encashment Provision Of ₹1,84,562/- U/S 43B(F) In Assessment Order Dated 11.05.2015, Involving Proceeding U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short As ‘The Act’. 2. We Come To Former Issue Of Depreciation Disallowance In Respect Of Assessee’S Licence To Collect Toll Charges On The Second Vivekananda Bridge.

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 43B