Provision for loss on investment is not a revenue obligation for ...

Provision for loss on investment is a capital expense, ineligible for deduction u/s 37(1) or depreciation. Allowing it fails the test.

Case Laws Income Tax

July 6, 2024

Provision for loss on investment is not a revenue obligation for the year and not eligible for deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. It represents a portion of investment capital, not falling under the block of assets defined in Section 2(11), thus ineligible for depreciation deduction. Allowing such provision fails the test prescribed u/s 37(1). There is no discretion for tax authorities to allow deduction for an inadmissible item. The item was glaringly appearing on financial statements but overlooked by the Assessing Officer while framing assessment u/s 143(3). The audit objection notified this obvious mistake, which was rectified u/s 154 after due process. Rectification of a mistake apparent on record, not requiring examination or verification, falls within the ambit of Section 154, as per the Supreme Court's ratio in TS Balram (ITO) Vs M/s Volkart Bros. The Tribunal upheld the rectification order, setting aside the impugned order.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Provision for loss on investment is not a revenue obligation for ...

Provision for loss on investment is a capital expense, ineligible for deduction u/s 37(1) or depreciation. Allowing it fails the test.

Case Laws Income Tax

July 6, 2024

You may also like:

Expenses under the head research and development - deduction of such expenses under the provisions of section 37(1) OR u/s 35 - the genuineness of the expenses cannot be...

The assessee claimed weighted deduction u/s 35(1)(ii) for donation made to M/s Shri Arvindo Institute of Applied Scientific Research Trust at the end of the year. The...

The assessee claimed deduction for interest and late fees paid on account of delay in filing GST returns. The authorities disallowed the claim, invoking Explanation 1 to...

The Appellate Tribunal addressed several issues: 1. Disallowance of Brand Ambassador Expenses - AO disallowed 75% as capital expenditure, but CIT(A) found it to be...

Disallowance of building renovation expenses – Capital or revenue expenses - the expenses are to be treated as revenue in nature and allowable u/s 37(1) of the Act - AT

Deduction u/s 35(2AB) for in-house Research and Development (R&D) expenses was disallowed as the assessee failed to properly explain the basis of claim and reconcile the...

The ITAT addressed various issues including disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r.8D, where Revenue challenged deletion of disallowance made by AO. ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s decision,...

Allowable expense u/s 37(1) - provisions for claim Incurred but Not Reported (IBNR) and claim Incurred But Not Enough Reported (IBNER) - whether such provisions are in...

Claim of expenses disallowed u/s 37(1) - expenditure/loss incurred on abandoned project – for the first two years the expenditure is shown as “work-in-progress” - claim...

Nature of expenses - Allowable expenses u/s 37(1) - Interest and late fee on TDS, Late payment & penalty charges, Interest on margin trading facility - There was no...

Disallowance of illegal expenses - A little bit of interplay between Section 115BBE and Section 37(1) of the Act might throw more light on both the provisions. If a loss...

Disallowance of corporate social responsibility expenses - There is no dispute that the expenses in question are not incurred under the aforesaid statutory obligation....

Allowability of deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act - Amount of service tax included with interest – expenses have direct nexus with the business operation - expense allowed - HC

Additions of CSR expenses - the amendment in section 37(1) of the Act has been introduced w.e.f. 1st April, 2015 and does not apply on the facts of the case and the...

Addition u/s 37(1) - non-competition fee - revenue or capital expenditure - it does not bring in any capital asset - the payment is allowable u/s 37(1) - HC

Quick Updates: