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.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
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 revenue in nature u/s 37. 2. Disallowance of Advertisement and Sales Promotion expenses - Tribunal disagreed with AO, stating expenses were for sales enhancement and profit, qualifying for deduction u/s 37. 3. Disallowance of Service Centre expenses - Tribunal upheld provision for warranty as industry practice, citing precedent for deduction u/s 37. Revenue's grounds were rejected in all three instances.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.