Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        1983 (12) TMI 36 - HC - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Deduction allowed for company's political party advertisement expenses The court allowed the entire expenditure of Rs. 50,000 incurred by a private limited company for advertisements in souvenirs by the Congress Party as an ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Deduction allowed for company's political party advertisement expenses

                          The court allowed the entire expenditure of Rs. 50,000 incurred by a private limited company for advertisements in souvenirs by the Congress Party as an allowable deduction under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court held that the expenditure was for commercial expediency and aimed at promoting the company's business beyond Tamil Nadu. The court emphasized that the timing or the publisher being a political party does not change the nature of the expenditure, and the effectiveness of the advertisements was not a criterion for allowability. The Revenue's arguments were dismissed, and the court ruled in favor of the assessee, awarding costs for the reference.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Whether the expenditure of Rs. 50,000 towards advertisements in souvenirs brought out by the Congress Party should be allowed as an allowable expenditure.
                          2. Whether the expenditure was a disguised donation to a political party.
                          3. Whether the advertisements failed to serve their purpose and thus should not be allowed as a deduction.

                          Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Allowability of Expenditure:
                          The primary issue was whether the expenditure of Rs. 50,000 incurred by the assessee, a private limited company engaged in financing business, towards advertisements in souvenirs brought out by the Congress Party at various districts outside Tamil Nadu, should be allowed as an allowable expenditure. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) initially disallowed the expenditure, considering it more of a donation rather than a business expense. However, on appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) allowed Rs. 25,000 as an allowable expenditure and disallowed the remaining Rs. 25,000. The Tribunal, upon further appeal, allowed the entire expenditure, reasoning that the assessee's business could potentially extend beyond Tamil Nadu, and the advertisements could benefit the business.

                          2. Disguised Donation to a Political Party:
                          The Revenue contended that the expenditure was essentially a donation to the Congress Party, disguised as advertisement expenses. They argued that such payments to a political party cannot be treated as allowable expenditure. However, the court observed that the Revenue did not take this specific stand before the authorities or the Tribunal. The court held that merely because the advertisements were published in souvenirs released by a political party on the eve of elections, it does not transform the expenditure into a donation. The court emphasized that the advertisements were indeed released and published, and the timing or the publisher being a political party does not change the nature of the expenditure.

                          3. Effectiveness of Advertisements:
                          The Revenue also argued that the advertisements in the souvenirs did not reach a cross-section of the community and thus failed as advertisements. The court, however, noted that the effectiveness of an advertisement is not the criterion for allowability of the expenditure. Advertisements are a recognized medium of publicity, and even if they do not bring immediate or direct benefits, they can still facilitate business indirectly. The court highlighted that the purpose of advertisements is to establish contact with potential customers, and even if a large section of the community did not see the advertisements, it does not negate the business purpose behind them.

                          Conclusion:
                          The court concluded that the expenditure incurred by the assessee was for commercial expediency and aimed at promoting its business. The advertisements, even if published in souvenirs by a political party, were intended to extend the business beyond Tamil Nadu. The court also referred to the Board Circular No. 200 dated June 28, 1976, which stated that no distinction should be made between expenditures on advertisements in souvenirs and other types of advertisements, and such expenditures should be allowed if the conditions under rule 6B of the I.T. Rules, 1962, are fulfilled. The court affirmed the Tribunal's decision to allow the entire expenditure of Rs. 50,000 as an allowable deduction under section 37(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, and answered the question in the affirmative, against the Revenue.

                          Costs:
                          The assessee was entitled to the costs of the reference, with counsel's fee set at Rs. 500.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found